Re: PowerPC buildd is looking for a new home
On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 08:25:18PM +0200, Joey Schulze wrote:
> Sven Luther wrote:
> > But the DSA team have refused to even consider those augsbourg machines,
> > probably because they where overloaded, and unwilling to share the work,
> > a bit like it is happening with the arm or sparc ports, where new
> > hardware was proposed, but ignored or rejected.
>
> Thanks Sven for accusing us without reason.
Err, i just forwarded the information about the facts, or do you prefer
me to forward your angry post of back then ?
> The DSA team does not add random machines. There is no ppc64 port,
> there is no need for ppc64 machines, there are powerpc build daemons
> and there's a powerpc porter machine which is not overloaded. Thus,
> no need for more machines, thus no more machines will be added.
I had intentions to work on the powerpc64 port, either in multiarch or
biarch way, and i told you this back then. Naturally, this got all lost
in the witch hunt against me which started in early 2006. It remains
that witout a powerpc64 buildd, no powerpc64 port is possible.
> See the debian-release list from last year when I asked about
> the need for these machines (or was it 2005?)
And if i remember well, i replied to it. maybe not on debian-release,
not sure, but i remember perfectly two occasions where i mentioned that,
once was when i contacted DSA originally, and you replied quite angrily
a "do you not think we have enough work to do without adding another
needless buildd" (from memory, paraphrased, and probably a bit
exagerated, so don't go balistic for it), and a second time when i
replied to some some list post which may or not have been the one you
speak about. I even volunteered to join DSA if it was needed with the
express purpose to manage that machine, so it would not cause extra
load.
Notice that the augsbourg machines are a complicated thingy, where
martin michlmair, then DD, did some negotiations with IBM without even
consulting the debian powerpc porters, and they ended up thinking they
donated those three augsbourg quad power5 to debian, while in fact they
did go to the augsbourg univrsity and we only discovered ways later
about it, together with probably the gnomicus or whoever that was
involvement in the matter, which was the context in which my demand on
the DSA team about those machines happened.
This was in no way accusations, but plain transparent informing about
how the situation appeared to me back then. Debian is sick of secrecy,
and not telling things, and secret cabals, and shameful dealings in the
darkness.
Saddened,
Sven Luther
Reply to: