Re: Developer accessible SPARC machine
On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 12:22:57AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 04:35:30PM -0800, Andrew Pollock wrote:
>
> > I note that one of the issues with the Sparc port is the the lack of a
> > developer accessible machine.
>
> At present, vore.debian.org is back on line; the underlying issue, though,
> seems to be that vore, like the buildds, won't necessarily *stay* on-line
> due to some hard-to-pin kernel bugs that keep taking the systems down.
>
> Anyway, I'm working with Stephen Frost (though "working" is a bit of an
> overstatement, he's currently waiting on me) to arrange hosting of a porter
> system with his employer; the space is all arranged, now it's just a matter
> of acquiring appropriate hardware.
>
> > I have at my disposal, an Ultra 5. Nothing fantastic, I know, but I'm sure
> > m68k's had less grunty boxes... It has a healthy amount of RAM, and I would
> > put a new hard drive in it (or would accept a hard drive purchased by SPI or
> > something).
>
> I think an Ultra 5 is probably a little light for our purposes: m68k's
> porter machine may be slower, but m68k also doesn't have, say, an
> openoffice.org port that might need debugging... Also, given the problems
> that consumer-grade DSL poses for system accessibility over the long term,
> I'd think that vore is still a better bet currently in spite of some past
> connectivity problems there, both connectivity-wise and bogomips-wise.
> Would you be willing to ship the system to Stephen if the search for better
> hardware pans out and vore proves unreliable in the long term?
>
I'd prefer not to relinquish posession of the box. Could it be added to the
pool of developer accessible machines anyway (with the more-the-merrier
reasoning), or is it considered insufficiently grunty bogo-mips-wise?
regards
Andrew
Reply to: