On Fri, Apr 26, 2002 at 06:02:31PM -0400, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote: > > There are three basic demands > > for machines of a given architecture: > > > > * Autobuilding. As a maintainer, I can safely say that alpha > > binaries for my packages are autobuilt very promptly after source > > upload, so there's no big need there. > > True, the autobuilder is quite capable. However, I'm not sure if it's > also providing developer access. If it is, and it's not as fast as the
The autobuilder is currently running on lully, which is more capable than any of the other alpha machines available. Indeed, it is one of the top two fastest buildds. > > * Miscellaneous machines for maintainers who need to debug/test > > their packages on a given architecture. Haven't heard this need > > expressed for alpha either (though ARM often gets this complaint). > > for an extended length of time due to serious hardware problems. I > believe those issues to be resolved, but am not sure about the current > status of them (I wanted to verify that the systems were healthy myself, We current have three alphas available for developer access. faure (potato), lully (woody), and escher (woody). > but haven't had the opportunity yet). ARM and powerpc still seem to > suffer from a lack of developer-accessible machines, however. arm has one developer accessable machine rameau, running potato. There is insufficient disk space for chroots for general use. debussy has the available hardware, but has not been returned to the colo for several months now. powerpc has one developer accessable machine voltaire, running sid. There isn't enough space for chroots for general use, but given that it runs sid, it isn't that much of a problem. Additional arm machines can be accessed by contacting pb, the port leader, an additional alpha is available by contacting rkrusty. -- Ryan Murray, Debian Developer ([EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]) The opinions expressed here are my own.
pgpkPEFLn8dEm.pgp
Description: PGP signature
