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.
