On 04/08/15(Tue) 17:49, Stuart Henderson wrote: > On 2015/08/03 14:49, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > > On 03/08/15(Mon) 14:15, Pascal Stumpf wrote: > > > I actually follow that practice for most games I maintain that require a > > > "beefier" machine, although they may build and package just fine on > > > !(amd64 || i386): vegastrike, speeddreams, flightgear, sumwars. I > > > believe enabling those on powerpc would only increase bulk build times > > > for very little gain. > > > > What you say is true for... let me guess... 95% of the ports we build on > > such architecture. Should we stop building packages then? > > While I generally agree, these 5 particular ports account for 3.5GB > of packages per arch. File distribution from the fanout to some of the > 2nd-level mirrors has never been particularly fast (plus it takes a > while to gzip this amount of data on a machine with slower CPU and > disks, and build times there are already pretty long) so disabling > these particular ports on arch where they aren't playable makes > a lot of sense to me.
Indeed, that makes sense to me too.
