Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Riku Voipio wrote:
>> I've tired using Debian on nfsroot/nbd on a Linksys wap54g. Unfortunatly
>> I ran out of ram often, and swapping over nfs patches have disappeared
>> into the time, while swapping over NBD gained some serious lockups..
>> An usb-slot
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005, Riku Voipio wrote:
> Hi Joey,
>
> Your response was very much what I needed to hear. I'll have to retract
> most of my worries.
>
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 07:20:07PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> > - A personal interest shared by me, tbm, and taggart is to get Debian
> >work
Joey Hess wrote:
> Both completly automated installs as well as an install that is
> automated through initial dhcp and then uses the existing
> network-console stuff that was developed for s390 to let you ssh into
> the installer.
Serial USB console is another possibility (d-i has the core suppor
Riku Voipio wrote:
> I've tired using Debian on nfsroot/nbd on a Linksys wap54g. Unfortunatly
> I ran out of ram often, and swapping over nfs patches have disappeared
> into the time, while swapping over NBD gained some serious lockups..
> An usb-slot seems to be necessary with current memory re
On Wed, Aug 24, 2005 at 10:46:18AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> You know, the wording of the original vancouver document, as well as the
> mood of the discussion that followed it seems to be pretty near such a madman
> scenario, so ...
You misunderstood. 'Madman scenario' as in the respective team
[Please do not CC me, I'm on the list]
Em Qua, 2005-08-24 às 11:36 +0100, Alastair McKinstry escreveu:
> Yes, there is: one of the more frequent uses of minority architectures
> is diversity in internet-facing machines: I've run sparc, powerpc and
> MIPs machines in this role, and am currently r
Gustavo Noronha Silva wrote:
Em Seg, 2005-08-22 às 00:34 +0300, Riku Voipio escreveu:
jffs2 image, which is then flashed to a pile of devices. Walking
through d-i every time would be very clumsy, so there is no use
for a working installer for those systems.
There's no use for a full
On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 10:55:11AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 21, 2005 at 10:16:53PM +0200, Peter 'p2' De Schrijver wrote:
> > > - security team, DSA, and release team must not veto inclusion
> >
> > Arbitrary veto power. This requirement is unacceptable for me. Noone
> > should b
Em Seg, 2005-08-22 às 19:45 +0200, Adrian von Bidder escreveu:
> On Monday 22 August 2005 11.25, Peter 'p2' De Schrijver wrote:
>
> [ the 'must have a working installer' requirement ]
>
> > > > Trivial. debootstrap does that.
> > >
> > > Debootstrap is not an installer, in very much the same way
Em Seg, 2005-08-22 às 00:34 +0300, Riku Voipio escreveu:
> jffs2 image, which is then flashed to a pile of devices. Walking
> through d-i every time would be very clumsy, so there is no use
> for a working installer for those systems.
There's no use for a full-blown stable release for such thing
Hi Joey,
Your response was very much what I needed to hear. I'll have to retract
most of my worries.
On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 07:20:07PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> - A personal interest shared by me, tbm, and taggart is to get Debian
>working on the various types of cheap mips wireless access
On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 02:48:58AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 11:21:00AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > I'd much rather have seen that point go, but that didn't happen.
>
> Meaning you would have preferred that there not be a requirement of buildd
> redundancy, or yo
On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 11:21:00AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 09:16:47AM +0200, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> > On 8/23/05, Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> > > > The number of buildds required to keep up with the
On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 09:16:47AM +0200, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> On 8/23/05, Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> > > The number of buildds required to keep up with the
> > > volume of uploaded packages must not be greater than two.
> > > Th
On 8/23/05, Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> > The number of buildds required to keep up with the
> > volume of uploaded packages must not be greater than two.
> > There must be that many buildds, in addition there must also be a redundant
>
On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 02:46:47AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> I would think that a weekly mozilla/galeon cvs snapshot upload could
> fall into the 'too long' category.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ wget -O -
'http://cvs.debian.org/srcdep/Packages-arch-specific?cvsroot=dak&rev=HEAD' |
grep mozil
Riku Voipio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Aug 21, 2005 at 10:54:43PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
>> * Peter 'p2' De Schrijver ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050821 22:39]:
>> > > - must have a working, tested installer
>
>> > Trivial. debootstrap does that.
>
>> How do you boot the system to ru
Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 12:04:11AM +0200, Peter 'p2' De Schrijver wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 12:00:07AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>> > On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 01:53:37PM +0200, Peter 'p2' De Schrijver wrote:
>> > > > Claiming "nobody sane wi
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> The number of buildds required to keep up with the
> volume of uploaded packages must not be greater than two.
> There must be that many buildds, in addition there must also be a redundant
> buildd.
This means 2 or 3?
Greetings
Bernd
--
To UNSUBSCR
Riku Voipio wrote:
> Machines and archs. On mips/mipsel/arm we have the situation that we
> support d-i on some legacy dead-end systems, while there is a pile new
> embedded systems on same arch. If you are working on the embedded side,
> it feels silly to maintain installer for machines you are n
On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 11:51:26AM +0200, Peter 'p2' De Schrijver wrote:
> > I don't agree with that interpretation of "arch-specific", and neither
> > do the maintainers of the Packages-arch-specific list AFAICT, so please
> > stop trying to use creative interpretations of people's words to torpe
On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 12:04:11AM +0200, Peter 'p2' De Schrijver wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 12:00:07AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 01:53:37PM +0200, Peter 'p2' De Schrijver wrote:
> > > > Claiming "nobody sane will ever use that" means someone who's actually
> >
On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 12:00:07AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 01:53:37PM +0200, Peter 'p2' De Schrijver wrote:
> > > Claiming "nobody sane will ever use that" means someone who's actually
> > > interested in using said software, even if it's slow is left out in the
> >
On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 01:53:37PM +0200, Peter 'p2' De Schrijver wrote:
> > Claiming "nobody sane will ever use that" means someone who's actually
> > interested in using said software, even if it's slow is left out in the
> > cold. That's silly.
>
> The user can always ask to build it or provide
"Peter 'p2' De Schrijver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I think you misunderstood me here. The limit is a upper limit, not a
lower limit.
Perhaps i'm wrong but let me pull up the original message. ...
- the release architecture must have N+1 buildds where N is
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write:
>The problem is not requiring a redundant buildd, the problem is
>the arbitrary limit on the amount of 'buildd machines' of 2.
Sparc currently has only one working buildd, which is having trouble
keeping up. At least one offer of an additional buildd was
On Monday 22 August 2005 11.25, Peter 'p2' De Schrijver wrote:
[ the 'must have a working installer' requirement ]
> > > Trivial. debootstrap does that.
> >
> > Debootstrap is not an installer, in very much the same way that tar
> > isn't, either.
>
> They both are. They can install debian, so it
Hi,
> > How do you boot to a system to run debian-installer when there is no
> > bios or bootloader on the system yet?
> Just take a look at the existing Debian ports, and you see that it's ok
> to use a bios that's part of the hardware.
Eh, that was not what I asked. My point was, that there i
> Uh, no. Just to name one example: tell me, are you absolutely and 100%
> sure no user will ever try to use a gecko-based browser on an older
> architecture? And yes, if you want to support that, that means you have
> to build mozilla
>
> There _are_ lightweight gecko-based browsers, you know.
>
>
> I don't agree with that interpretation of "arch-specific", and neither
> do the maintainers of the Packages-arch-specific list AFAICT, so please
> stop trying to use creative interpretations of people's words to torpedo
> the proposal that porters should be accountable for their ports.
>
I
On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 12:09:00PM +0200, Peter 'p2' De Schrijver wrote:
> > > but well, I suppose the line is hard to draw.
> >
> > Exactly, and that is why we don't try.
> >
> > I agree with you that mozilla is probably fairly useless on m68k. But if
> > you start excluding packages, you'll fai
> > but well, I suppose the line is hard to draw.
>
> Exactly, and that is why we don't try.
>
> I agree with you that mozilla is probably fairly useless on m68k. But if
> you start excluding packages, you'll fairly soon end up on a slipperly
> slope where you start excluding packages, and in the
On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 11:05:59AM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> Le Lun 22 Août 2005 10:29, Peter 'p2' De Schrijver a écrit :
> > This is still somewhat arch specific code as it assumes iopl and the
> > availability of an isa bus. I'm more thinking of packages which
> > require a lot of RAM to bu
On Sun, Aug 21, 2005 at 10:16:53PM +0200, Peter 'p2' De Schrijver wrote:
> > - must be freely usable (without NDA)
> > - must be able to run a buildd 24/7 without crashing
> > - must have an actual, working buildd
> > - must include basic UNIX functionality
>
> Whatever that may mean
That we don'
> > Trivial. debootstrap does that.
>
> Debootstrap is not an installer, in very much the same way that tar
> isn't, either.
>
They both are. They can install debian, so it's an installer.
> > > - security team, DSA, and release team must not veto inclusion
> >
> > Arbitrary veto power. This
On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 11:05:59AM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> Le Lun 22 Août 2005 10:29, Peter 'p2' De Schrijver a écrit :
> > Hi,
> >
> > > The "reasonable foundation" for having a redundant buildd in a
> > > separate physical location is, I think, well-established. Any
> > > random facility
Quoting Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> code that's not portable, then I don't see any point at all in treating
> these as release architectures to begin with, because at that point
> they're *not* shipping the same OS that the other architectures are.
Agreed, however, I would see "optional"
Le Lun 22 Août 2005 10:29, Peter 'p2' De Schrijver a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> > The "reasonable foundation" for having a redundant buildd in a
> > separate physical location is, I think, well-established. Any
> > random facility can lose power, perform big router upgrades, burn
> > down, etc. Debian mac
* Peter 'p2' De Schrijver ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050822 10:44]:
> > > How do you boot to a system to run debian-installer when there is no
> > > bios or bootloader on the system yet?
> >
> > Just take a look at the existing Debian ports, and you see that it's ok
> > to use a bios that's part of the
> > How do you boot to a system to run debian-installer when there is no
> > bios or bootloader on the system yet?
>
> Just take a look at the existing Debian ports, and you see that it's ok
> to use a bios that's part of the hardware.
>
> > Should debian-installer support
> > installing via JTAG
On Sun, Aug 21, 2005 at 11:24:48PM +0200, Peter 'p2' De Schrijver wrote:
> > > > Overall:
> > > > - must have successfully compiled 98% of the archive's source
> > > > (excluding arch-specific packages)
> >
> > > Useless requirement. Less then 98% of the archive may be useful for the
> > > arch
Hi,
> The "reasonable foundation" for having a redundant buildd in a separate
> physical location is, I think, well-established. Any random facility
> can lose power, perform big router upgrades, burn down, etc. Debian
> machines also seem to be prone to bad RAM, bad power supplies, bad disk
> a
On Sun, Aug 21, 2005 at 11:28:00PM -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote:
>
> [Andreas Barth]
> > > "machine" translates with partition btw - though the two different
> > > partitions should be in different physical locations, for obvious
> > > reasons. Yes, we want a redundancy for good reasons.
> [p2]
* Riku Voipio ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050822 00:07]:
> On Sun, Aug 21, 2005 at 10:54:43PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > * Peter 'p2' De Schrijver ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050821 22:39]:
> > > > - must have a working, tested installer
>
> > > Trivial. debootstrap does that.
>
> > How do you boot the
[Andreas Barth]
> > "machine" translates with partition btw - though the two different
> > partitions should be in different physical locations, for obvious
> > reasons. Yes, we want a redundancy for good reasons.
[p2]
> Which is very arbitrary to me, machine to me means physical box with
> har
On Sun, Aug 21, 2005 at 11:24:48PM +0200, Peter 'p2' De Schrijver wrote:
> > well, if the package is bogus from the language usage, than that's not
> > the porters problem (but how often did that hit exactly one arch?). If
> I have seen multiple examples of builds failing because the testsuite or
On Sun, Aug 21, 2005 at 10:54:43PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Peter 'p2' De Schrijver ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050821 22:39]:
> > > - must have a working, tested installer
> > Trivial. debootstrap does that.
> How do you boot the system to run debootstrap? (Note: the answer
> "gentoo" or "Win
Hi,
>
> > Bogus requirement. At the moment we have less then 1 s390 buildd for
> > example.
>
> "machine" translates with partition btw - though the two different
> partitions should be in different physical locations, for obvious
> reasons. Yes, we want a redundancy for good reasons.
>
Which
Hi,
* Peter 'p2' De Schrijver ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050821 22:39]:
> Some comments :
> > - must include basic UNIX functionality
> Whatever that may mean
there are processes. there is dns name resolution. there is networking.
there is chroot. etc. Just really basic things (and, of course, none of
Hi,
Some comments :
> Initial:
> - must be publically available to buy new
Trivially true for any architecture, even VAX.
> - must be freely usable (without NDA)
> - must be able to run a buildd 24/7 without crashing
> - must have an actual, working buildd
> - must include basic UNIX functional
50 matches
Mail list logo
