On Sat, 22 Jun 2013, Andreas Barth wrote: > > * mips: existing machines are either not reliable or too slow to keep > > up; we suspect that they may not be easily replaceable.
> Also, if we buy more mipsel machines we could convert the mipsel > swarms to mips ones (and so replace broken machines, see below) - > mostly depends on how urgent you think this is. If our existing eight-year old hardware is the only mips machines we can reasonably get then that doesn't bode well for mips. We don't think relying on the SWARMs (alone) is an option. > > * mipsel: the porter machine and some of the buildd machines have an > > implementation error for one opcode; missing kernel in the archive > > Different answers - select the one you like most: > 1. We could buy a some loongson 2f machines (or newer), see e.g. > http://www.tekmote.nl/epages/61504599.sf/nl_NL/?ObjectPath=/Shops/61504599/Products/CFL-006 > plus some memory. These machines have kernels in the archive, and not > the hardware bug with choking on too many nop-instructions in a row. AIUI these machines have a maximum memory of only 1GB. That's probably OK for now but might be problematic in the long term. > 3. We have currently two new machines with loongson 3a processors to > test. It will take a bit of time to finally get a working kernel on > these, but that would also decrease build-times quite much. When do you expect them to be usable? If not any time soon then maybe we should try to get a couple of loongson 2f machines. Would four machines of this type be sufficient to replace all our exist swarm and 2e machines as buildds? If so, should we just get 5 (4buildd+1porterbox)? Cheers, -- | .''`. ** Debian ** Peter Palfrader | : :' : The universal http://www.palfrader.org/ | `. `' Operating System | `- http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mips-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130624085150.gc15...@anguilla.noreply.org