Re: Releasability of the HPPA port
On Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 03:30:41AM +0200, Philipp Kern wrote:
> Dear HPPA porters, dear HPPA port users,
>
> the Release Team is currently wondering if it makes sense to release with
> HPPA as a regular stable architecture with squeeze. It might be that
> it is not up to the standards of a regular Debian release. We seem to
> chase random segmentation faults, causing multiple give-backs to eventually
> yield a built package.
I realize this doesn't address the larger concerns you mention, but..
I've found that a workstation I recently acquired (a c3700) seems
to reliably build packages that reliably fail on our existing
buildds (subversion, for one). I assume CPU architecture differences
allow this box to be immune to the issues causing these builds to
fail.
Due to the formfactor, I don't think HP would be able to host it and
my upstream bandwidth at home is too limited. If the project wanted to
make this machine a buildd and find hosting for it, I'd be willing to
maintain the buildd.
> Especially this is also causing concerns from a security building point of
> view, as autobuilding has to work for this.
>
> If it's not entirely up to our standards, would a separate suite, like it
> has been done in the past for etch-m68k, help having some sort of release that
> can be updated independently from the main stable release? Such a suite could
> also be useful to land larger changes than normally allowed for stable and
> maybe to continue the hppa port from a stable foundation for some time.
>
> I think we do agree that it will be included into stable for the last time.
>
> Kind regards,
> Philipp Kern
--
dann frazier
Reply to: