On 06-09-17 10:52 -0500, Carlo Segre wrote: > > Hello All: > > I am continuing to have problems with fityk timing out on the arm buildd. > The package takes a lot of resources to compile (up to 300M or RAM for > some files) and the resulting binary is an X11 program. > > I have been working with upstream to solve some optimization problems with > the g++-4.1 compiler but this will not likely help the timing out of the > arm buildd since the problem has existed for the last revision of the > package as well. > > The question is this. Is fityk really a package that is useful for the > arm architecture? Only those who use arm can tell me this. If it isn't > maybe I should exclude arm from the architecture list or the package can > be marked "not-for-us". I don't even what to try porting it myself using > leisner as that machine has only 64M or RAM and I am sure that it will be > painful if even possible.
A quick read of the decription suggests that a vanishingly small part of the populace would want to run this package on arm. I can think of any sensible reason to want to do diffraction pattern analysis on an arm box, although in theory someone might need some nonlinear curve-fitting software. If it uses a lot of floating point (which seems likely) then it really would be bonkers to run it on arm. I'd be perfectly happy to have it marked 'not-for-us'. There is a whole class of software for doing various sorts of numerical analysis that are not really appropriate for arm, but 'there isn't any point' has not to date been considered a justification for not including something in an architecture. There would be some benefit from a discussion about defining a set of 'no point on low-powered architectures' packages. Wookey -- Aleph One Ltd, Bottisham, CAMBRIDGE, CB5 9BA, UK Tel +44 (0) 1223 811679 work: http://www.aleph1.co.uk/ play: http://wookware.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
