Re: debian hppa

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 05:49:36PM +0200, Thibaut VARENE wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 1:20 AM, John David Anglin
> <dave.anglin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Hi Thibaut,
> >
> > On 13-Jun-11, at 6:19 PM, Thibaut VARENE wrote:
> >
> >>> I would say your other machines need updating even if the process is
> >>> somewhat rocky as that's the only way a broadbased release can be tested.
> >>
> >> Well I can assign one machine (the a500, being easy to reboot/fix as
> >> it is) to testing kernels, but for a stable kernel suitable for the
> >> machines I'm e.g. assigning to the GCC Compile Farm[0], what would be
> >> a good SMP kernel version to choose? I'm looking for the same level of
> >> hassle-freeness as 2.6.22.19 since these machines are under relatively
> >> heavy load and I cannot afford to tend to their care on a daily basis
> >> ;-)
> >
> > Sorry for the delay in responding.  I think assigning the a500 to the GCC
> > farm
> > provides good visibility.  For GCC, the kernel version doesn't matter much.
> >  The
> > main issue is stability.
> 
> OK, so I suppose it's fine to stick with 2.6.22.19? I thought there
> were issues with un-implemented syscalls and such, so I don't really
> know...
> 
> > I was wondering if the rp3440 in the ESIEE might be assigned to running
> > debian
> > buildd.  I believe that the current set of known kernel patches will make
> > this
> > machine reasonably stable under medium load.  Carlos recently found a big
> > bug in the kernel futex code.  In any case, I recently successfully built
> > many
> > unstable packages on my rp3440.
> >
> > I would be willing to help getting this going.
> 
> I have no problem with this, the only "active" user of the rp3440 is
> Aurélien, so I suppose it wouldn't be a problem. Yet, my understanding
> is that the rp3440 is extremely slow at building anything (much slower
> than my other machines, it seems) because of the cache flush issues.
> AIUI that's why Debian stuck to J6700 for buildds, because those
> machines were a lot faster.

I don't think speed was really a concern - it was more hardware
availability and some hand-wavy belief that these machines would be
more stable.

Honestly, the most reliable build machine I've used is my
C3700. I don't recall ever having any build issues with
that. Anything it gives up in speed is definitely outweighed by
having to e.g. retry gcc 5 times before succeeding. By the end of the
port, I'd normally handbuild new gcc uploads here to avoid thrashing
on the real buildds. If given the option, I'd recommend 3 of those
boxes for a buildd ring.

> Other than that, the rp3440 currently runs unstable with 2.6.22.19, so
> I suppose a complete reinstall would be in order, and I'm not sure I
> have time to deal with that just yet. I'd be happy to provide remote
> access to the machine though, if someone steps up. FWIW, the only
> machine I have left running lenny is a J5000, 2x440MHz PA8500,
> previously used as an autobuilder for debian-multimedia.org.
> 
> HTH,
> T-Bone
> 
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-parisc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Photo]     [Yosemite News]    [Yosemite Photos]    [Free Online Dating]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

Add to Google Powered by Linux