Le 15/05/2012 22:27, Michael Banck a écrit : > 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. >
The problem with the octeons is that while they have many cores (32 in our case), they don't have an FPU. That's why heavy floating-point code is slow. I have a swarm at home doing nothing since we moved, if we can find a place to host it, it seems the best way to go. -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 [email protected] http://www.aurel32.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
