Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
On Tue, 2023-06-20 at 22:46 +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > Can I suggest that if you file a few bugs and add some information in > it so that maybe someone can look at it? If it only affects one > architecture, send a mail to that list asking for help. PS: when filing architecture-specific bugs, please also set the BTS usertags and XCC the ports lists for the architectures effected. https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Debbugs/ArchitectureTags -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Please update Ports wiki page
On Sun, 2016-07-10 at 20:40 +0200, Holger Wansing wrote: > I have attached a new diff and the new resulting html file. This is a great band-aid to the current situation, thanks. Longer-term, we should look at making aspects of it automatically generated based on the list of arches in the Release files of the main and ports archives. Otherwise it will continually require patches. -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Please update Ports wiki page
On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 9:55 AM, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > The Ports wiki page (https://www.debian.org/ports/) appears to be out > of date. Its causing confusion among users and maintainers. For > example, a few bugs were reported for Sparc even though Tokarev, a > QEMU--static maintainer, states its no longer supported. > > Spark should probably be labelled as discontinued. I've CCed the SPARC porters, hopefully they can come up with a patch for this. I expect they would be interested to hear about bugs in qemu so they can fix them. -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification
On Wed, 2016-06-15 at 01:37 +0300, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote: > At the openmainframeproject EU meetup, it was indicated that SUSE > joined with indication that Open Build Service might be able to use > resources hosted by Marist. > > I wonder if it makes sense to reach out, and see if there are > resources available to use as porter boxes & build boxes. That way > Debian might be able to get such donated resource available on ongoing > basis and hopefully with some hw support. Marist already support Debian with an s390x buildd: ldapsearch -LLL -x -h db.debian.org -b ou=hosts,dc=debian,dc=org "(sponsor=*marist*)" https://db.debian.org/machines.cgi?host=zani Our other sponsors for s390 are www.iic.kit.edu and www.zivit.de: ldapsearch -LLL -x -h db.debian.org -b ou=hosts,dc=debian,dc=org "(architecture=s390*)" sponsor -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: notker: Sunfire T2000 hosted at brown.edu: for sparc64?
On Sun, 2016-01-10 at 14:27 +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > Any updates from brown.edu staff btw? Staff from Brown have burned the ISO and inserted the disk apparently. -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: notker: Sunfire T2000 hosted at brown.edu: for sparc64?
On Sun, 2016-01-10 at 14:27 +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > Any updates from brown.edu staff btw? Not yet, sorry. -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: notker: Sunfire T2000 hosted at brown.edu: for sparc64?
On Mon, 2015-12-28 at 16:00 +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > Alright, please have them download and burn this ISO and insert it into > the T2000 so I can try booting and installing the machine: > > > https://people.debian.org/~glaubitz/debian-cd/ Sorry for the delay, I've asked them to burn the netinst and put it into the CD/DVD drive of the machine. https://people.debian.org/~glaubitz/debian-cd/debian-9.0-sparc64-NETINST-1.iso -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
notker: Sunfire T2000 hosted at brown.edu: for sparc64?
Hi folks, DSA has a Sunfire T2000 called notker hosted at brown.edu that we never got around to setting up as a Debian buildd/porterbox. Since wheezy is EOL in April and we have several other sparc machines, we figured it would be best to pass the hardware along to the sparc64 porting effort. Would this be useful for the sparc64 porting effort? If so, who should we send the ALOM credentials to? -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: notker: Sunfire T2000 hosted at brown.edu: for sparc64?
On Sat, 2015-12-19 at 19:13 +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > Absolutely. We currently don't have any install images available yet. Do > you think you could install it with debootstrap natively with sparc64 > instead? I think you could do a minimal sparc Wheezy installation, > then debootstrap sparc64 onto a separate partition and then point > the bootloader to the new chroot. I have no idea about sparc installs, so I'll leave it to you to do that if you don't mind. If you need us to ask Brown to burn and insert a CD or something, let us know. Currently we only have ALOM access. > Me :) Sent privately. -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: schroeder and lebrun EOL - decomission
On Wed, 2015-10-14 at 11:25 +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > a team at Oracle which is still actively supporting Linux on SPARC That seems surprising, do you have a reference for this? -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: schroeder and lebrun EOL - decomission
On Wed, 2015-10-14 at 11:37 +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > Sure: https://lists.debian.org/debian-sparc/2015/10/msg00012.html Wow, great news :) -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: schroeder and lebrun EOL - decomission
On Sat, 2015-09-26 at 23:18 +0200, Hector Oron wrote: > DSA would like to decomission lebrun and schroeder (old sparc build > daemons). Please if you think this is a bad idea for some reason, let > me know, otherwise those will be decomissioned in the following > weeks. If there are people wanting to work on the sparc64 port perhaps we could ship them to those people or turn them into sparc64 porterboxen? -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Time to change the debian-ports list?
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 1:21 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: I'm in favor of the old design because I think it's important to havw a list which can be used to make announcements about important issues that all porters should be aware of. We have debian-devel-announce for that, the existing spray list could be renamed -ports-announce if it is actually needed. It's not really that mails going to debian-ports@ appear that often. Unfortunately, when they do, they are more often not appropriate to be posted there. -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-sparc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CAKTje6FyRWPGP119cuFsXcjnesD=txyo+yxv22cw-1bqz9+...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Good news on Debian Sparc port stability
On Jun 4, 2015, at 11:07 AM, James Y Knight wrote: I hope this can help avoid Sparc needing to be deleted from Debian... The official criteria for being in the main archive and being released in a Debian stable release are available here: https://ftp-master.debian.org/archive-criteria.html https://release.debian.org/testing/arch_policy.html https://release.debian.org/testing/arch_qualify.html I'll add some further thoughts here: There needs to be a team of Debian folk pro-actively looking at build and stability issues, responding to questions from users and DSA and keeping the website/wiki pages and other documentation updated. https://buildd.debian.org/status/architecture.php?a=sparcsuite=sid https://www.debian.org/ports/sparc/ https://wiki.debian.org/PortsSparc?action=fullsearchvalue=sparctitlesearch=Titles There needs to be interest in Linux on SPARC upstream in the toolchain community and the Linux community, both on bare metal and otherwise. Something has to be decided about the sparc64 port, is it going to replace the sparc port, co-exist with it or what? https://wiki.debian.org/Sparc64 It would be great if Oracle or other vendors would support the Debian SPARC port(s) by donating more modern and faster hardware, as other vendors have done for arm64, mips, ppc64el etc. There need to be people or organisations actually interested in using the Debian SPARC ports, otherwise the only point is portability. Right now there is 1 known user of sparc64 and 120 of sparc. http://popcon.debian.org/ -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Good news on Debian Sparc port stability
On Jun 4, 2015, at 11:07 AM, James Y Knight wrote: I'm not sure what lack of proper kernel support means I guess that is referring to the trouble DSA were having with sompek and stadler, which would freeze almost every day and have to be reset via the ALOM management processor. This was solved by using the Linux backport from wheezy-backports. DSA would prefer to use kernels from wheezy with the relevant commits backported than full Linux backports. https://db.debian.org/machines.cgi?host=sompek https://db.debian.org/machines.cgi?host=stadler -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Debian Archive architecture removals
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 5:48 PM, Cyril Brulebois wrote: Lucas Nussbaum lu...@debian.org (2015-05-04): I'm wondering if we could find a way to accomodate those architectures in an official way, while still limiting the impact on ftpmasters and other teams. I'm not entirely clear on the status of debian-ports.org, and of what the current downsides of using debian-ports are. Maybe it's just about supporting and advertising debian-ports as Debian's official way to host second-class architectures. Maybe there's more to it. What are the current downsides of moving hurd-i386 and sparc to debian-ports? Last I heard about it, it was understaffed and infra was undersized + needed some changes to make it possible to grow. This was some time ago, so I've added admin@ to make sure we get updated intel on this topic. zumbi was working on moving debian-ports to debian.org infrastructure and got some of it done (the website for instance). I asked him about it on IRC and got this response: pabs zumbi: this mail looks like it needs a status update re ports.d.o https://lists.debian.org/20150504062822.ga24...@xanadu.blop.info zumbi pabs: we had this: https://titanpad.com/debian-ports zumbi pabs: I was hoping for debcamp/debconf to be able to finish it up zumbi (however I am still unsure about if I'll be able to attend event) pabs zumbi: may I copy that into email or can you? zumbi pabs: feel free to copy it zumbi pabs: it needs someone with wanna-build database experience, some dsa, aurel32 (and maybe some ftp-master) to complete the work -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-sparc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CAKTje6FXYe0te=rE-2B0-8OCgdG=tut_et66mkhu6rgnjwc...@mail.gmail.com
Guide to getting ported?
Hi all, Do any porters have any input on this page? https://wiki.debian.org/GettingPorted -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bug#730258: please add arch-specific BTS tags
On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 5:53 AM, Don Armstrong wrote: These are the list of ports that I see: I would strongly suggest not hardcoding this list and instead harvesting the Architecture fields of the Release files for oldstable - experimental on ftp.d.o, ftp.d-p.o and maybe archive.d.o. We have made this mistake and similar ones (usually hardcoding release codenames) in the QA infrastructure and it has bitten us hard in the past. Lets not make that mistake here. The release files are the closest to a canonical list of ports. There are other ports out there not maintained on d-p.o (like the Interix or Solaris ones for example) but I don't think we need to bother about those until they move closer to Debian. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-sparc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/caktje6evh+_xumxvgd5w8a8kd1laxgggylnmuxstbllu4ou...@mail.gmail.com
re-queuing a package on the sparc buildd?
Hi all, I would like to get the sparc buildd to re-queue my package (build failed[1] due to a typo in dh_strip[2]) [EMAIL PROTECTED] seems unresponsive thus far (Blars Blarson mailed them about nsis on 16 Jun). Does anyone have any advice on how to get this resolved so nsis 2.06-5 can go into etch? Alternatively, would someone be willing to do a binary-only upload? The developers-reference seems to indicate this is acceptable[3]. 1. http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.php?pkg=nsisver=2.06-5arch=sparcstamp=1118712301file=logas=raw 2. http://packages.qa.debian.org/d/debhelper/news/2.html 3. http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/ch-pkgs.en.html#s-binary-only-nmu -- bye, pabs http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=pabs3%40bonedaddy.netcomaint=yes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
