On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 11:27:20PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Nov 09, Daniel Schepler wrote:
>
> > I've asked a couple people in private mail about this, and haven't
> > gotten any answer, so I thought I'd ask here for ideas. Where would
> > be a good place to upload what I have so far from
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 10:47:43AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On the other hand, widespread dumb-ass assumptions about i386/amd64 may
> cause quite a bit of issues: basically any Makefile that talks about "x86"
> is somewhat suspicious. This is the main reason one may want to oppose
> the inclu
On Sat, 10 Nov 2012, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 11:27:20PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > On Nov 09, Daniel Schepler wrote:
> > > I've asked a couple people in private mail about this, and haven't
> > > gotten any answer, so I thought I'd ask here for ideas. Where would
> > >
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Maxime Hadjinlian
* Package name: plum
Version : 0.1
Upstream Author : Maxime Hadjinlian
* URL : http://github.com/maximeh/plum
* License : BSD
Programming Lang: C++, Python, Shell Scripts
Description : plum is a
On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 07:48:22PM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> There used to be a single global default level (9) for all compressors,
> which got changed in 2010 to be backend specific, but only xz and lzma
> were reduced to 6. I don't have any problem with changing gzip (to its
> upstream defau
On 11/10/2012 08:15 PM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> 3) Memory usage of some common server workload. E.g. email with
> amavisd-new+spamassassin (perl is a memory pig in amd64), or a LAMP stack
> with some common web application
Hi,
I cannot tell for the other use cases, but for what's abo
On Sat, 10 Nov 2012 13:55:41 +0100
Maxime Hadjinlian wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: Maxime Hadjinlian
>
> * Package name: plum
> Version : 0.1
> Upstream Author : Maxime Hadjinlian
> * URL : http://github.com/maximeh/plum
> * License :
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Neil Williams wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Nov 2012 13:55:41 +0100
> Maxime Hadjinlian wrote:
>
>> Package: wnpp
>> Severity: wishlist
>> Owner: Maxime Hadjinlian
>>
>> * Package name: plum
>> Version : 0.1
>> Upstream Author : Maxime Hadjinlian
>> * URL
On Sat, 10 Nov 2012 15:52:44 +0100
Maxime Hadjinlian wrote:
> >> * Package name: plum
> > netconsole on many more products. The package name is far from being as
> > specific as the package itself. General purpose names are (relatively)
> > fine for general purpose programs.
> Well, plum is
> On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 10:47:43AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > On the other hand, widespread dumb-ass assumptions about i386/amd64 may
> > cause quite a bit of issues: basically any Makefile that talks about "x86"
> > is somewhat suspicious. This is the main reason one may want to oppose
>
On Sat, 10 Nov 2012, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 11/10/2012 08:15 PM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > 3) Memory usage of some common server workload. E.g. email with
> > amavisd-new+spamassassin (perl is a memory pig in amd64), or a LAMP stack
> > with some common web application
> Hi,
>
>
On 10/11/12 16:10, Peter Samuelson wrote:
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 10:47:43AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
On the other hand, widespread dumb-ass assumptions about i386/amd64 may
cause quite a bit of issues: basically any Makefile that talks about "x86"
is somewhat suspicious. This is the main
On Sat, 10 Nov 2012, Peter Samuelson wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 10:47:43AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > > On the other hand, widespread dumb-ass assumptions about i386/amd64 may
> > > cause quite a bit of issues: basically any Makefile that talks about "x86"
> > > is somewhat suspicious.
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 04:22:34PM +, Philip Ashmore wrote:
> Apologies in advance that this is off-topic or just a silly question.
>
> If I want my C source code to build correctly on x32, how do I
> choose the correct printf format strings for int32_t, int64_t etc?
Use the appropriate macr
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 4:51 PM, Neil Williams wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Nov 2012 15:52:44 +0100
> Maxime Hadjinlian wrote:
>
>> >> * Package name: plum
>
>> > netconsole on many more products. The package name is far from being as
>> > specific as the package itself. General purpose names are (rel
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 02:15:14PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> Yes, I know :) Our amavisd-box at work has 16GiB RAM and 16 cores,
> we need at least that much to be able to run 64 instances with the
> scratch directories on tmpfs...
> x32 would be most likely a _MAJOR_ win for that
(Sorry for broken threading, I'm not currently subscribed to debian-devel.)
At some time in the past, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> Can someone give us numbers? Using VMs or even the bare metal, it should be
> possible to gather some statistics about memory usage for x32 versus amd64
> fo
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 10:47:43AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 11:27:20PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > On Nov 09, Daniel Schepler wrote:
> > > I've asked a couple people in private mail about this, and haven't
> > > gotten any answer, so I thought I'd ask here for ideas
Am Samstag, den 10.11.2012, 15:52 +0100 schrieb Maxime Hadjinlian:
> On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Neil Williams wrote:
> > On Sat, 10 Nov 2012 13:55:41 +0100
> > Maxime Hadjinlian wrote:
> >
> >> Package: wnpp
> >> Severity: wishlist
> >> Owner: Maxime Hadjinlian
> >>
> >> * Package name
Adam Borowski wrote:
>On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 11:27:20PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>> On Nov 09, Daniel Schepler wrote:
>>
>> > I've asked a couple people in private mail about this, and haven't
>> > gotten any answer, so I thought I'd ask here for ideas. Where would
>> > be a good place to upl
❦ 10 novembre 2012 19:28 CET, Steve McIntyre :
> So, should we do it?
Here is an interesting link against it:
http://blog.flameeyes.eu/2012/06/debunking-x32-myths
--
die_if_kernel("Kernel gets FloatingPenguinUnit disabled trap", regs);
2.2.16 /usr/src/linux/arch/sparc/kernel/traps.c
Am Sat, 10 Nov 2012 18:28:14 +
schrieb Steve McIntyre :
> Adam Borowski wrote:
> >On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 11:27:20PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> >> On Nov 09, Daniel Schepler wrote:
> >>
> >> > I've asked a couple people in private mail about this, and
> >> > haven't gotten any answer, so I
On 10/11/12 18:28, Steve McIntyre wrote:
Hmmm, can't find any direct links to them,
though. :-( Maybe somebody else can fill in here?
These?
http://people.ubuntu.com/~alanbell/uds-r/uds-r-foundations-r-x32-planning-latest.txt
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/foundations-r-x32-pl
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 06:02:36PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 10:47:43AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > That'd make it mostly worthless. If you need to co-install amd64 packages
> > on the same system (but not physical machine!), memory gains are gone.
>
> Right now th
+++ Steve McIntyre [2012-11-10 18:28 +]:
> *If* we want to include x32, it's worth describing it and
> understanding the potential benefits properly and getting some
> benchmarks. There's been some work in Ubuntu on the benchmarking front
> (as I saw mentioned in a session at UDS last week[1])
]] Adam Borowski
> For some strange reason, i386 is the only architecture that's allowed to
> have its buildds emulated on a foreign arch.
It's not more emulated on a foreign arch than, say, sparc is.
[...]
> [I propose postponing this part of the flamewar until there's an aptable
> source you
Package: wnpp
Owner: gregor herrmann
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,debian-p...@lists.debian.org
* Package name: libhash-diff-perl
Version : 0.005
Upstream Author : Bjorn-Olav Strand
* URL : http://search.cpan.org/dist/Hash-Diff/
* Lice
On Sat, 10 Nov 2012, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 02:15:14PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > Yes, I know :) Our amavisd-box at work has 16GiB RAM and 16 cores,
> > we need at least that much to be able to run 64 instances with the
> > scratch directories on tmpfs...
On Sat, 2012-11-10 at 20:14 -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Nov 2012, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 02:15:14PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > > Yes, I know :) Our amavisd-box at work has 16GiB RAM and 16 cores,
> > > we need at least that mu
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 08:30:06PM +, Wookey wrote:
> +++ Steve McIntyre [2012-11-10 18:28 +]:
>
> > *If* we want to include x32, it's worth describing it and
> > understanding the potential benefits properly and getting some
> > benchmarks. There's been some work in Ubuntu on the benchmar
On Sun, 11 Nov 2012, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-11-10 at 20:14 -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > On Sat, 10 Nov 2012, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > > On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 02:15:14PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
> > > wrote:
> > > > Yes, I know :) Our amavisd-box at work h
On Sun, 11 Nov 2012, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 08:30:06PM +, Wookey wrote:
> > +++ Steve McIntyre [2012-11-10 18:28 +]:
> > > *If* we want to include x32, it's worth describing it and
> > > understanding the potential benefits properly and getting some
> > > benchmarks.
On Sat, 2012-11-10 at 22:53 -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Nov 2012, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Sat, 2012-11-10 at 20:14 -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > > On Sat, 10 Nov 2012, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > > > On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 02:15:14PM -0200, Henrique de M
Le Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 06:28:14PM +, Steve McIntyre a écrit :
>
> *If* we want to include x32, it's worth describing it and
> understanding the potential benefits properly and getting some
> benchmarks.
Hi all,
would it make sense to use the autopkgtest (DEP8) framework to
provide benchmark
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Scott Kitterman
* Package name: opendmarc
Version : 1.0.0
Upstream Author : "Murray S. Kucherawy" , The Trusted
Domain Project
* URL : http://www.trusteddomain.org/opendmarc/
* License : BSD
Programming Lang: C
Descr
On 11/11/2012 04:20 AM, Adam Borowski wrote:
> Thomas Goirand says it's 400MB vs 700MB. I really doubt these numbers as
> over 75% of all variables in all running programs would need to be pointers
> so something must be amiss, but even far more conservative estimates you can
> get by looking at e
Quoting Maxime Hadjinlian (maxime.hadjinl...@gmail.com):
> What about :
> Description : lacie u-boot netconsole shell
> ?
>
> Now the dumb question, to change the description, what do I do ? I
> wasn't able to find that info in the docs :/
> Should I also add a more detailed description at th
37 matches
Mail list logo
