Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sat, Apr 30, 2005 at 11:50:30AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
1. release team
Another arch to sync. And, as with every arch, there would be some
packages that fail just there. There are still a lot of amd64 specific
FTBFS bugs (lots of them
On Sat, Apr 30, 2005 at 11:50:30AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Sorry, but I still don't understand it:
You could continue to offer the complete archive as it is today, and it
shouldn't be a big amount of work to offer one or more partial
Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Sorry, but I still don't understand it:
You could continue to offer the complete archive as it is today, and it
shouldn't be a big amount of work to offer one or more partial archives
(e.g. only stable or only i386) from different locations - and a
hoi :)
On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 05:22:53PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
Why not? removing arm from testing does not change at all the number of
binary arm packages being pushed each day, as the packages between
testing and unstable are shared (and only few packages go in via t-p-u).
So, the
* Martin Waitz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050429 15:40]:
On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 05:22:53PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
Why not? removing arm from testing does not change at all the number of
binary arm packages being pushed each day, as the packages between
testing and unstable are shared (and
Martin Waitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
hoi :)
On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 05:22:53PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
Why not? removing arm from testing does not change at all the number of
binary arm packages being pushed each day, as the packages between
testing and unstable are shared (and only
On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 03:50:37PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
* Martin Waitz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050429 15:40]:
On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 05:22:53PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
Why not? removing arm from testing does not change at all the number of
binary arm packages being pushed each
On 23-Apr-05, 17:24 (CDT), Andreas Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Beyond the fact that it is too late to add another architecture for
sarge, removing arm from sarge does not make the mirror pulses much
smaller - and AFAIK the size of the mirror pulses is the main problem.
See, that just makes
On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 09:24:28AM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
On 23-Apr-05, 17:24 (CDT), Andreas Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Beyond the fact that it is too late to add another architecture for
sarge, removing arm from sarge does not make the mirror pulses much
smaller - and AFAIK the
* Steve Greenland ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050425 16:45]:
On 23-Apr-05, 17:24 (CDT), Andreas Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Beyond the fact that it is too late to add another architecture for
sarge, removing arm from sarge does not make the mirror pulses much
smaller - and AFAIK the size of
Le lundi 25 avril 2005 à 16:54 +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar a écrit :
See, that just makes no sense whatsover. You can claim either:
1) Adding AMD64 would increase the mirror load unacceptably
OR
2) Removing ARM would not have a significant effect on the mirror load
but not both at
* Josselin Mouette ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050425 18:20]:
Le lundi 25 avril 2005 à 16:54 +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar a écrit :
See, that just makes no sense whatsover. You can claim either:
1) Adding AMD64 would increase the mirror load unacceptably
OR
2) Removing ARM would not have
Adrian Bunk schrieb:
On Sat, Apr 23, 2005 at 01:20:42PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Sat, Apr 23, 2005 at 04:24:28PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
A silly question to you as release manager:
What exactly are the technical reasons why amd64 can't simply be shipped
as 12th architecture with sarge?
On Sat, Apr 23, 2005 at 07:55:52AM +0200, Andreas Jochens wrote:
Steve Langasek wrote:
Andreas Jochens wrote:
It will only be necessary to describe the current situation
in the official release documents and include pointers
to the separate amd64 archive, which will be provided
by
On Sat, Apr 23, 2005 at 12:26:45AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
Well, the other big ones would be the installer, being synced up on sources,
and the ability to do point releases. It seems the first two are addressed,
and the third seems to be more or less the same question as that of
On Sat, 23 Apr 2005, Adrian Bunk wrote:
A silly question to you as release manager:
Silly indeed. Use the list archives. You cannot miss the monstruous threads
about it.
What exactly are the technical reasons why amd64 can't simply be shipped
as 12th architecture with sarge?
Mirror space.
On Sat, Apr 23, 2005 at 11:40:03AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Sat, 23 Apr 2005, Adrian Bunk wrote:
A silly question to you as release manager:
Silly indeed. Use the list archives. You cannot miss the monstruous threads
about it.
I didn't miss the threads, but much of it
On Sat, 23 Apr 2005, Adrian Bunk wrote:
I might have missed this email in the huge threads, but could you point
me to an email explaining why increasing the archive space by less than
10% exacly hits a hard limit in mirror space?
No, I cannot.
--
One disk to rule them all, One disk to
Hello Steve,
thank you for your reply to my status report.
Steve Langasek wrote:
Andreas Jochens wrote:
It will only be necessary to describe the current situation
in the official release documents and include pointers
to the separate amd64 archive, which will be provided
by the amd64
On Sat, Apr 23, 2005 at 04:24:28PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Sat, Apr 23, 2005 at 12:26:45AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
Well, the other big ones would be the installer, being synced up on sources,
and the ability to do point releases. It seems the first two are addressed,
and the
On Sat, Apr 23, 2005 at 01:20:42PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Sat, Apr 23, 2005 at 04:24:28PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
A silly question to you as release manager:
What exactly are the technical reasons why amd64 can't simply be shipped
as 12th architecture with sarge?
We are
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 23 Apr 2005, Adrian Bunk wrote:
A silly question to you as release manager:
Silly indeed. Use the list archives. You cannot miss the monstruous threads
about it.
What exactly are the technical reasons
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
We are already running into size constraints (on an ongoing basis) with our
mirrors
We dont need to have all architectures on all mirrors. And for the
less-often used architectures we event dont need to care, since one or two
mirrors can easyly hold a
Le samedi 23 avril 2005 à 13:20 -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit :
We are already running into size constraints (on an ongoing basis) with our
mirrors due to the size of the archive.
Given that - if I believe the security team [1] - we are not able to
provide security updates for arm, even in
On Sun, Apr 24, 2005 at 12:12:42AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le samedi 23 avril 2005 à 13:20 -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit :
We are already running into size constraints (on an ongoing basis) with our
mirrors due to the size of the archive.
Given that - if I believe the security team
Le samedi 23 avril 2005 à 15:18 -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit :
If we dropped arm, it would be to drop arm, not to trade it for something --
it's way too late to be talking about adding amd64 to the main archive for
sarge.
Why? If the amd64 archive already uses the same sources as the main
* Josselin Mouette ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050424 00:15]:
Le samedi 23 avril 2005 à 13:20 -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit :
We are already running into size constraints (on an ongoing basis) with our
mirrors due to the size of the archive.
Given that - if I believe the security team [1] - we are
On Sun, Apr 24, 2005 at 12:12:42AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le samedi 23 avril 2005 à 13:20 -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit :
We are already running into size constraints (on an ongoing basis) with our
mirrors due to the size of the archive.
Given that - if I believe the security team
On Sun, Apr 24, 2005 at 12:24:44AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
* Josselin Mouette ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050424 00:15]:
Le samedi 23 avril 2005 à 13:20 -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit :
We are already running into size constraints (on an ongoing basis) with
our
mirrors due to the size of
* Adrian Bunk ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050424 00:30]:
On Sun, Apr 24, 2005 at 12:12:42AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le samedi 23 avril 2005 à 13:20 -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit :
We are already running into size constraints (on an ongoing basis) with
our
mirrors due to the size of
I demand that Bernd Eckenfels may or may not have written...
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
We are already running into size constraints (on an ongoing basis) with
our mirrors
We dont need to have all architectures on all mirrors. And for the
less-often used architectures we event
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, 23 Apr 2005, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Sat, Apr 23, 2005 at 04:24:28PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Sat, Apr 23, 2005 at 12:26:45AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
A silly question to you as release manager:
What exactly are the technical reasons
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Apr 24, 2005 at 12:12:42AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le samedi 23 avril 2005 à 13:20 -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit :
We are already running into size constraints (on an ongoing basis) with our
mirrors due to
As a preparation for the amd64 porters irc meeting tomorrow,
I tried to build the complete Debian sarge archive for the
amd64 architecture from the unpatched Debian sarge sources.
It took about a week to build all 8800+ source packages on a standard
single processor EM64T-P4 box (Every package
Hi Andreas,
On Fri, Apr 22, 2005 at 08:05:17PM +0200, Andreas Jochens wrote:
I consider this a good way to split up responsibilities.
This way of handling things could serve as a good example of
how other ports may be organized after sarge is released.
I certainly agree with that;
Hello,
On Fri, Apr 22, 2005 at 08:05:17PM +0200, Andreas Jochens wrote:
As a preparation for the amd64 porters irc meeting tomorrow,
I tried to build the complete Debian sarge archive for the
amd64 architecture from the unpatched Debian sarge sources.
The result was very encouraging.
36 matches
Mail list logo
