On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 12:57:28AM +0200, Thibaut VARENE wrote: > On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 11:34 PM, dann frazier <da...@dannf.org> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 05:09:25PM -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote: > >> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Luk Claes <l...@debian.org> wrote: > > >> > * The machines that host the buildds still seem to have a very > >> > unreliable kernel. Is there any update on this? > >> > >> I can't comment on this. > > > > Thibaut had planned to setup a second buildd (and I think had it up > > for a while?) but that box experienced a hardware failure. We're also > > working on moving one of the buildds to a different platform > > (rp2470). We have no specific reason to believe that will be any > > better, but its worth a shot. > > Yes the supplementary buildd had a major hardware failure today > (SBA/LBA failures during last POST and now the GSP can't load PDC > anymore. The machine is basically dead). I'm switching the hard drives > to another box I have that I used elsewhere (not yet back online as > the Debian kernel seems to have major trouble coping with PCI addon > NICs - tulip and tg3 HPMC the machine on driver load), and I'm still > hoping to get feedback on some hardware donation requests I've made a > month or so ago. > > I hereby take the opportunity to say that I would gladly welcome any > rackable parisc system in my server room. :-) > > >> I run stock: linux-image-2.6.26-1-parisc64-smp (2.6.26-13) > >> on my SMP 2x PA8700 system without any problems. > > > > There are several reports of stability on various mixtures of > > kernel/platform - and the non-buildd debian.org hppa machine seems to > > be quite stable as well. But, once we start running a buildd on > > something, instability issues abound. > > The only issue I've been aware of so far was the ruby build problem. > If there are others, they need more publicity I think. OTOH, ISTR > Carlos said most of the problems could go away with the transition to > NPTL. Might be worth a try...
I hand-built an NPTL environment before and it didn't help, but maybe something has gotten fixed since. But this certainly isn't the only stability issue - both buildds regulary hang hard and need rebooting. The hangs are fairly random - there doesn't appear to be anything consistent about them (not building the same package, running the same command, etc). > >> > * The debian-installer dailies that are now built again, but seem to > >> > fail to build most of the time. Is there any particular reason for this? > >> > >> No idea. Do you have a log? http://d-i.debian.org/daily-images/hppa/daily/ Problems all appear to be w/ dpkg. build_netboot.log has this: Unpacking console-keymaps-at (from udebs/console-keymaps-at.udeb) ... *** glibc detected *** dpkg: corrupted double-linked list: 0x00100c58 *** dpkg: error processing udebs/dhcp3-client-udeb.udeb (--unpack): subprocess dpkg-split killed by signal (Aborted) build_miniiso.log has this: Unpacking busybox-udeb (from udebs/busybox-udeb.udeb) ... dpkg: error processing udebs/cdebconf-newt-terminal.udeb (--unpack): subprocess dpkg-split killed by signal (Segmentation fault) Errors were encountered while processing: udebs/cdebconf-newt-terminal.udeb make[2]: *** [stamps/tree-unpack-miniiso-stamp] Error 1 make[1]: *** [_build] Error 2 make: *** [build_miniiso] Error 2 > I would blame recent failures on failure to build kernel, maybe? > AFAICT there was the phonet issue (fixed since then) and it seems > recent kernel builds fail to link the btrfs module... These have been fixed in svn and an upload is scheduled for tomorrow. -- dann frazier -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-hppa-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org