Am 29.10.2013 17:48, schrieb Ian Jackson:
(Mind you, I have my doubts about a process which counts people
promising to do work - it sets up some rather unfortunate incentives.
I guess it's easier to judge and more prospective than a process which
attempts to gauge whether the work has been
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 08:53:05AM +0100, Niels Thykier wrote:
[1] I certainly wouldn't have space for something like this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Z800_2066_JKU.jpeg
(and much less the money. Yeah I know that is technically not an s390,
but as I understand it, an s390 should
Niels Thykier writes (Re: Potential issues for most ports (Was: Re: Bits from
the Release Team (Jessie freeze info))):
On 2013-11-03 16:03, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
http://udd.debian.org/bugs.cgi?release=jessie_or_sidmerged=ignfnewerval=7kfreebsd=1sortby=severitysorto=desccseverity=1ctags=1
On Tue, 05 Nov 2013, Niels Thykier wrote:
In this regard; I am guilty of filing some those bugs without tagging
them. Honestly, adding the tags get a bit in the way right now. If a
package FTBFS on 4 architectures, I have to dig up 3-4 different
usertags (with different user) and associate it
On Tue, 05 Nov 2013, Don Armstrong wrote:
On Tue, 05 Nov 2013, Niels Thykier wrote:
In this regard; I am guilty of filing some those bugs without tagging
them. Honestly, adding the tags get a bit in the way right now. If a
package FTBFS on 4 architectures, I have to dig up 3-4 different
Hi,
On 05/11/13 18:50, Don Armstrong wrote:
On Tue, 05 Nov 2013, Don Armstrong wrote:
This sounds like a case where we should turn these usertags into fully
fledged tags. [Or alternatively, they should just be made usertags under
the debian-po...@lists.debian.org user or similar.]
Either of
On Tue, 05 Nov 2013, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
Well, I did ask for the creation of port-specific tags back at
debconf8 (if I'm not mistaken), but you told me to go for usertags
instead ;-)
Sounds familiar. Usertags have the advantage of not requiring me to do
any work. But presumably at the time
On 03/11/13 10:54, Niels Thykier wrote:
Come to think of it; maybe we should have a BTS page for each of the
ports (e.g. a pseudo package in the BTS).
We've had this on kfreebsd, due it to having been a release goal:
On 2013-11-03 16:03, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
On 03/11/13 10:54, Niels Thykier wrote:
Come to think of it; maybe we should have a BTS page for each of the
ports (e.g. a pseudo package in the BTS).
We've had this on kfreebsd, due it to having been a release goal:
On 2013-11-03 23:04, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Sun, Nov 03, 2013 at 11:54:34AM +0100, Niels Thykier wrote:
[...]
I suppose a sponsor-only DD could be sufficient, provided that the
sponsor knows the porters well enough to be willing to sign off on e.g.
access to porter boxes. I guess the
On 2013-10-29 17:48, Ian Jackson wrote:
Niels Thykier writes (Re: Bits from the Release Team (Jessie freeze info)):
[...]
As mentioned we are debating whether the 5 DDs requirement still makes
sense. Would you say that we should abolish the requirement for DD
porters completely? I.e. Even
Niels Thykier dixit:
Then there are more concrete things like ruby's test suite seg. faulting
on ia64 (#593141), ld seg. faulting with --as-needed on ia64
And only statically linked klibc-compiled executables work on IA64,
not dynamically linked ones. I’ve looked into it, but Itanic is so
On Sun, Nov 03, 2013 at 11:54:34AM +0100, Niels Thykier wrote:
On 2013-10-29 17:48, Ian Jackson wrote:
Niels Thykier writes (Re: Bits from the Release Team (Jessie freeze
info)):
[...]
As mentioned we are debating whether the 5 DDs requirement still makes
sense. Would you say that we
Niels Thykier writes (Bits from the Release Team (Jessie freeze info)):
Results of porter roll-call
===
...
Summary table:
Arch || DDs || NMs/DMs || Other || Total
- ---++-++-++---++--
armel || 5 || 0 || 2
On 2013-10-29 16:05, Ian Jackson wrote:
Niels Thykier writes (Bits from the Release Team (Jessie freeze info)):
Results of porter roll-call
===
...
Summary table:
Arch || DDs || NMs/DMs || Other || Total
Niels Thykier writes (Re: Bits from the Release Team (Jessie freeze info)):
On 2013-10-29 16:05, Ian Jackson wrote:
I'm keen that Debian should continue to support a wide range of
architectures. Would it help if I, as a DD, volunteered to sponsor
porter uploads for any architecture
Hi Peter,
Quoting peter green (2013-10-27 01:11:24)
Johannes Schauer wrote:
Until these two issues are fixed we will not be able to get an algorithmic
answer to the question of what constitutes the minimum required set of
packages.
There is also the complication of what I will call
Hi,
On Mittwoch, 23. Oktober 2013, Stewart Smith wrote:
Jenkins can have slaves on remote hosts, via SSH. It runs a small java
app there, so as long as the arch has a JVM then you're pretty right.
that JVM is not even needed, just schedule jobs via ssh and be done.
cheers,
Holger
Hi,
(I was not able to find the debian-ports list on lists.debian.org (so I
subscribed via email) did I just miss it?)
Quoting Steven Chamberlain (2013-10-23 22:04:59)
I had a play with the 'botch' tool (see description[1]) for determining build
order when bootstrapping an architecture.
botch
Johannes Schauer j.scha...@email.de (2013-10-26):
(I was not able to find the debian-ports list on lists.debian.org (so I
subscribed via email) did I just miss it?)
Dead list: http://lists.debian.org/debian-ports/
AFAICT it's now an alias for all debian-$port lists.
Mraw,
KiBi.
Johannes Schauer wrote:
Until these two issues are fixed we will not be able to get an algorithmic
answer to the question of what constitutes the minimum required set of
packages.
There is also the complication of what I will call non-key self
building compilers. fpc is an example
These
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 12:36 AM, Stewart Smith
stew...@flamingspork.com wrote:
Jenkins can have slaves on remote hosts, via SSH. It runs a small java
app there, so as long as the arch has a JVM then you're pretty right.
For whatever definition of small. I've seen it consuming 1 GiB of
I run Jenkins at my job. Small is around 256mb. Plus the Jenkins server can
sit on a high-memory machine and the agent just sit on a 68k box doing
builds. Small is like 64M ram. You Amiga/Atari guys seem to have oodles of
ram to work with Lol.
On Oct 23, 2013 2:45 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven
Small is 64m ram not 256m. I just woke up and was catching up on things. My
apologies.
On Oct 23, 2013 7:20 AM, Britt Dodd brittman...@gmail.com wrote:
I run Jenkins at my job. Small is around 256mb. Plus the Jenkins server
can sit on a high-memory machine and the agent just sit on a 68k box
On 22/10/13 23:36, Stewart Smith wrote:
Jenkins can have slaves on remote hosts, via SSH. It runs a small java
app there, so as long as the arch has a JVM then you're pretty right.
That may be useful to set up on some arches, for things where Jenkins
needs direct control over CPU-intensive
Geert Uytterhoeven ge...@linux-m68k.org writes:
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 12:36 AM, Stewart Smith
stew...@flamingspork.com wrote:
Jenkins can have slaves on remote hosts, via SSH. It runs a small java
app there, so as long as the arch has a JVM then you're pretty right.
For whatever definition
On 23/10/13 12:55, Stewart Smith wrote:
Geert Uytterhoeven ge...@linux-m68k.org writes:
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 12:36 AM, Stewart Smith
stew...@flamingspork.com wrote:
Jenkins can have slaves on remote hosts, via SSH. It runs a small java
app there, so as long as the arch has a JVM then
Steven Chamberlain dixit:
Come to think of it, it must take a day or more for m68k to rebuild
eglibc. This is a more serious problem than resources needed by
Kernel takes a day now (on the fastest VMs), eglibc 3 days,
gcc 5 days (since gcj got folded into it; add another day or
so once gnat
Hi Niels,
This was quite interesting as it seems to tie in with some other
projects that are already being pursued...
On 21/10/13 16:42, Niels Thykier wrote:
I would love for us to have an automated system to give us a
weather-report on the toolchain for each architecture. It would be
nice
Steven Chamberlain ste...@pyro.eu.org writes:
On 21/10/13 16:42, Niels Thykier wrote:
I would love for us to have an automated system to give us a
weather-report on the toolchain for each architecture. It would be
nice both for us to see how ports are doing and for porters to spot and
fix
On 2013-10-19 16:38, Jeremiah C. Foster wrote:
Hello,
On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 05:01:31PM +0200, Niels Thykier wrote:
[snip freeze policy]
Hi,
I s/-arm/-ports/'ed the CC, since I figured the rest of the porters
would find the answer equally interesting.
Results of porter roll-call
31 matches
Mail list logo
