2017-02-08 15:14 GMT+01:00 Jesus Cea :
> On 08/02/17 11:24, Victor Stinner wrote:
>> So I suggest to drop official Solaris support, but I don't propose to
>> remove the C code specific to Solaris. In practice, I suggest to
>> remove Solaris and OpenIndiana buildbots since they are broken for
>> mon
On 08/02/17 17:06, Jesus Cea wrote:
> On 08/02/17 16:18, Jesus Cea wrote:
>> I am trying to convince him to launch buildbot process tree with an
>> "ulimit" to protect the machine. Lets see.
>>
>> Sorry. Thanks for your patience.
>
> I am launching now the buildbot with a limit of 1GB *PER PROCESS
On 08/02/17 16:18, Jesus Cea wrote:
> I am trying to convince him to launch buildbot process tree with an
> "ulimit" to protect the machine. Lets see.
>
> Sorry. Thanks for your patience.
I am launching now the buildbot with a limit of 1GB *PER PROCESS*. At
least, when the memory skyrockets it wi
On 08/02/17 11:24, Victor Stinner wrote:
> So I suggest to drop official Solaris support, but I don't propose to
> remove the C code specific to Solaris. In practice, I suggest to
> remove Solaris and OpenIndiana buildbots since they are broken for
> months and are more annoying than useful.
The m
On 08/02/17 11:24, Victor Stinner wrote:
> So I suggest to drop official Solaris support, but I don't propose to
> remove the C code specific to Solaris. In practice, I suggest to
> remove Solaris and OpenIndiana buildbots since they are broken for
> months and are more annoying than useful.
Give
Hi,
Is there anything new about Solaris or OpenIndiana since September?
Right now, it seems like the cea-indiana-x86 buildbot slave is offline
since longer than 54 days.
Oracle decided to stop Solaris 12 development:
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/01/oracle-sort-of-confirms-d
On Mon, 26 Sep 2016 at 15:38 Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Thanks for the reality check Trent! I think if enough people with core
> committer bits want to keep supporting Solaris / Illumos / OpenIndiana
> / other variants that's fine, but I don't think that just having some
> VMs to test on is enough
Thanks for the reality check Trent! I think if enough people with core
committer bits want to keep supporting Solaris / Illumos / OpenIndiana
/ other variants that's fine, but I don't think that just having some
VMs to test on is enough -- we also need people who can fix problems
if those buildbots
I work for Joyent (joyent.com) now, which employs a number of devs that
work on illumos (illumos.org). We also provide cloud infrastructure. Would
it help if we offered one or more instances (VMs) on which to run buildbot
slaves (and on which volunteers for bug fixing could hack)? I know a lot
of
My guess is that Oracle owns the brand "Solaris" and its awful lawyers
have done this. I don't think it's worth our time to support either
Solaris or its descendants unless Oracle pays for it. It's too bad for
the open source participants in OpenIndiana but realistically we just
can't afford the di
Illumos, OpenIndiana et al are open source forks of Solaris.
Back before the acquisition by Oracle, Sun open sourced the Solaris OS, called
it OpenSolaris and encouraged projects to use it as an OS for x86 and other
architectures. But after the acquisition, the OpenSolaris project seemed to end
What on earth is OpenIndiana? Its website is a mystery of buzzwords
and PR vagueness:
"openindiana
Community-driven Illumos Distribution"
"What is illumos ?
From the illumos developer’s guide: “illumos is a consolidation of
software that forms the core of an Operating System. It includes the
ker
Hi,
My question is simple: do we officially support Solaris and/or OpenIndiana?
Jesus Cea runs an OpenIndiana buildbot slave:
http://buildbot.python.org/all/buildslaves/cea-indiana-x86
"Open Indiana 32 bits"
The platform module of Python says "Solaris-2.11", I don't know the
exact OpenIndiana ve
13 matches
Mail list logo
