Re: Latest features in autopkgtest-cloud

On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 11:23 AM Florent 'Skia' Jacquet wrote: > > Hello there, > > Here is a summary of the latest features that just landed in the > autopkgtest-cloud web UI, just for you to enjoy: > > * All the pages under > https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/$package_name now have links

Re: autopkgtest-cloud mostly back to normal operation

On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 10:02 AM Julian Andres Klode wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 09, 2021 at 04:36:25PM +0200, Julian Andres Klode wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > we are currently severily limited by having turned off all arm64 > > bos01 workers, and now bos01 networking being broken. > > bos01 networking

Re: state of the autopkgtest cloud

On Wed, Jun 09, 2021 at 04:36:25PM +0200, Julian Andres Klode wrote: > Hi all, > > we are currently severily limited by having turned off all arm64 > bos01 workers, and now bos01 networking being broken. > > I disabled bos01 arm64 workers on May 27, because it was a bit > unstable, and xnox

Re: pkgstripfiles killed during build

On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 8:30 AM, Dmitry Shachnev wrote: > Hi all, > > I get a strange error with “mathjax” package on Ubuntu buildds. > > One of the binary packages (fonts-mathjax-extras) contains a lot of small > PNG files. And with the last upload (2.7.0-2) I get this [1]: >

Re: OpenGL to OpenGL ES change on arm64?

On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Steve Langasek <steve.langa...@ubuntu.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 01:03:53PM -0600, Dann Frazier wrote: >> [ Reorganized to use inline replies ] >> On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Kevin Gunn <kevin.g...@canonical.com> wrote: >

Re: OpenGL to OpenGL ES change on arm64?

[ Reorganized to use inline replies ] On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Kevin Gunn wrote: > On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 10:47 AM, Matthias Klose wrote: >> >> LP: #1586026 asks for the removal of binary packages on arm64 which cannot >> be >> built with OpenGL

Re: [RFC] CONFIG_ARM64_64K_PAGES=y for vivid?

On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Adam Conrad adcon...@ubuntu.com wrote: On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 05:36:25PM -0700, Dann Frazier wrote: There's the question of whether or not we would be penalizing the performance of other classes of workloads people want to run on arm64. If there are some

[RFC] CONFIG_ARM64_64K_PAGES=y for vivid?

We've measured significant performance improvements for several benchmarks by using 64K pages (SPECint, sysbench mysql, and kernel compiling)[*]. I'd therefore like to discuss whether or not we should switch to 64K pages in vivid. There's the question of whether or not we would be penalizing the