Re: Architecture qualification
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 09:45:43PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 20:42:14 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > On Tue, 2012-05-15 at 20:42 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 16:18:19 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > > > In an effort to stop this stalling any further / longer, I propose
> > > > sending [1] to each of the port lists, probably some time tomorrow.
> > > >
> > > > Comments / changes / updates / whatever welcome.
> > > >
> > > I'd add a concern about the mips buildds to the arch qual page (not sure
> > > how to phrase it).
> >
> > Assuming it's the stability issue, then maybe re-using weasel's
> > "unstable under load" which we used for the porter box?
> >
> There's that, and there's some packages that can only be built on ball
> because lucatelli/corelli fail every time. azeem has a bunch of those.
Those were number-crunching testsuites and they timed out - I am not
sure what the relative hardware specs are but it could be that corelli
is just too slow to run those (likely floating-point heavy) test suites
in the sbuild time limit.
I haven't looked closer, though.
Michael
Reply to: