Re: which serious bugs exactly? (Re: if you care about debian on powerpc, please react ...)
On Thu, Nov 30, 2006 at 12:17:07PM +0100, Holger Levsen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sunday 26 November 2006 15:09, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > > currently shiping powerpc hardware are :
> > > > IBM pseries : not really supported, patch sitting without comment
> > > > since months, early work lost because of svn commit conflicts.
> > > raise the bug severity? which bug#, btw?
> >
> > Outstanding bugs -- Normal bugs; Patch Available (1 bug)
> > #394970: finish-install: [powerpc64] Add support for IBM serial consoles
> > (hvc and hvsi)
> > Package: finish-install (finish-install 2.4); Reported by: Sven Luther
> > <luther@debian.org>; Tags: patch; 33 days old
>
> Sven, the last info on this bug is from you, saying that you would test the
> patch Frans corrected the coming (and now past) weekend. You didn't post an
> update how the test went, so I'm not surprised the patch isn't commited.
I didn't, because
1) the box is not connected now, and i had the XServe G5 in the rack, which
was being prepared to be put in production, and due to bugs like :
#397973 [powerpci/mac] partman-md appears to not write back the raid flag to partitions.
This took longer, and i was able to put it in the datacenter only yesterday,
freeing the rack.
2) The p505 i have on lend from IBM now has the VIOS server installed, and i
need to read the 150+ pages of documentation to become familiar with the
LPAR setup code, before doing the test.
3) Last sunday, we did my 2 year son's birthday party, which didn't leave me
time to do the testing, especially given the issues with 1), and other work
related issues, which had more priority.
So, no, i didn't have time to test it, the day has only so much hours, and you
would understand, that family live and RL work takes priority, as so many have
been telling me recently.
Now, there is no excuse to not commit the patch, especially the one modified
by Frans, to the svn, and indeed i expect it to be commited already, just
waiting for my test to upload the package.
Even then, what really needs testing, is the check for the patch to not break
finish-install on other hardware, to make sure there are no regressions, and
this would be better served by the patch going in ASAP, rather than waiting
longer. This would also allow to setup a call for user to test, rather than
relying on only me.
> How did the test went? Is the patch now fine? Could you please add this
> information to the bugreport?! Thanks.
>
> As you mention this bug in this thread under the "powerpc should be removed
> because arch support is poor" label (which I still think isn't true), I
> wonder if the severity "normal" is correct.
Well, if i upgrade severity, i am sure to get an immediate backlash, but you
are free to do so if you like.
In general, i would seriously welcome more people working on the powerpc port,
and not people like you leaving all the pressure on me, or like frans said
once : "we won't bother fixing powerpc issues, since we know svenl will
eventually fix them". This doesn't scale well to me having less time due to RL
issues, as you might guess. And may have been one of the cause of the
escalation of those problems back in spring, there is such a thing like
over-stressing your human ressources, any good leader should know that :)
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: