[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Developer accessible SPARC machine

On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 05:13:54PM +1000, Andrew Pollock wrote:
> 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?

That'd be DSA's call; but given that it probably wouldn't be sufficient, it
also seems unnecessary, so I guess it would be a low priority.  You could
always make a standing offer of individual accounts to DDs (or non-DDs, as
we often have NMs who need help getting access for porting issues), I

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org                                   http://www.debian.org/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: