Re: debian hppa

Re: debian hppa

[John David Anglin]

On Fri, 27 May 2011, Carlos O'Donell wrote:

> On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 10:56 AM, dann frazier <dannf@dannf.org> wrote:
> > Probably. debian-ports is the only other option I know of - but it
> > means we need people to step up and do random bits of release work
> > (keeping a working installer, etc). I also think we'd need to have
> > some notion of a "stable" release - I don't think an unstable-only
> > release is very useful outside of a developer's basement, and not
> > something I'd want to host our infrastructure systems on.
> >
> > Since I don't see that happening, yes, Gentoo.
> >
> 
> We need like 3-4 more people on the project to properly support
> debian-ports for hppa. I don't think that type of support is going to
> materialize any time soon.

It's unclear whether any volunteer support for hppa remains within
"debian".  I added the parisc-linux list to the cc list to make people
aware of the situation.

Aside from the issue about releases, the buildd process is stuck
due to unresolved dependencies.  Maybe it should be shutdown to
preserve state.

> Therefore I think Gentoo is probably the best option for the community.
> 
> I don't care how we achieve a sustainable distribution for hppa, only
> that we continue to provide value to our user community.

There is some hppa work still being done in Gentoo, so I tend to agree
but I have no direct experience with it.

Dave
-- 
J. David Anglin                                  dave.anglin@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca
National Research Council of Canada              (613) 990-0752 (FAX: 952-6602)

Re: debian hppa

[James Bottomley]

On Fri, 2011-05-27 at 12:24 -0400, John David Anglin wrote:
> On Fri, 27 May 2011, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 10:56 AM, dann frazier <dannf@dannf.org> wrote:
> > > Probably. debian-ports is the only other option I know of - but it
> > > means we need people to step up and do random bits of release work
> > > (keeping a working installer, etc). I also think we'd need to have
> > > some notion of a "stable" release - I don't think an unstable-only
> > > release is very useful outside of a developer's basement, and not
> > > something I'd want to host our infrastructure systems on.

I also don't think an unstable only release is viable.  Can't we just
run a private buildd on stable, testing and unstable?

> > > Since I don't see that happening, yes, Gentoo.
> > >
> > 
> > We need like 3-4 more people on the project to properly support
> > debian-ports for hppa. I don't think that type of support is going to
> > materialize any time soon.
> 
> It's unclear whether any volunteer support for hppa remains within
> "debian".  I added the parisc-linux list to the cc list to make people
> aware of the situation.
> 
> Aside from the issue about releases, the buildd process is stuck
> due to unresolved dependencies.  Maybe it should be shutdown to
> preserve state.
> 
> > Therefore I think Gentoo is probably the best option for the community.
> > 
> > I don't care how we achieve a sustainable distribution for hppa, only
> > that we continue to provide value to our user community.
> 
> There is some hppa work still being done in Gentoo, so I tend to agree
> but I have no direct experience with it.

Sure ... I've no objection to moving from debian to gentoo if that means
we get a working distribution.  It's a bit of a hassle, since I have to
move all my x86 boxes as well (don't ask, complex infrastructure with a
parisc as gateway mirror in the middle), but I suppose it's pain only
once.

James

Re: debian hppa

[dann frazier]

On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 11:29:15AM -0500, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-05-27 at 12:24 -0400, John David Anglin wrote:
> > On Fri, 27 May 2011, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> > 
> > > On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 10:56 AM, dann frazier <dannf@dannf.org> wrote:
> > > > Probably. debian-ports is the only other option I know of - but it
> > > > means we need people to step up and do random bits of release work
> > > > (keeping a working installer, etc). I also think we'd need to have
> > > > some notion of a "stable" release - I don't think an unstable-only
> > > > release is very useful outside of a developer's basement, and not
> > > > something I'd want to host our infrastructure systems on.
> 
> I also don't think an unstable only release is viable.  Can't we just
> run a private buildd on stable, testing and unstable?

debian-ports has offered to provide this infrastructure for us - but
they currently only build sid. We'd need some extra manpower to help
them work on the processes to maintain other suites.

> > > > Since I don't see that happening, yes, Gentoo.
> > > >
> > > 
> > > We need like 3-4 more people on the project to properly support
> > > debian-ports for hppa. I don't think that type of support is going to
> > > materialize any time soon.
> > 
> > It's unclear whether any volunteer support for hppa remains within
> > "debian".  I added the parisc-linux list to the cc list to make people
> > aware of the situation.
> > 
> > Aside from the issue about releases, the buildd process is stuck
> > due to unresolved dependencies.  Maybe it should be shutdown to
> > preserve state.
> > 
> > > Therefore I think Gentoo is probably the best option for the community.
> > > 
> > > I don't care how we achieve a sustainable distribution for hppa, only
> > > that we continue to provide value to our user community.
> > 
> > There is some hppa work still being done in Gentoo, so I tend to agree
> > but I have no direct experience with it.
> 
> Sure ... I've no objection to moving from debian to gentoo if that means
> we get a working distribution.  It's a bit of a hassle, since I have to
> move all my x86 boxes as well (don't ask, complex infrastructure with a
> parisc as gateway mirror in the middle), but I suppose it's pain only
> once.
> 
> James
> 
> 

Re: debian hppa

[dann frazier]

On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 12:24:54PM -0400, John David Anglin wrote:
> On Fri, 27 May 2011, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 10:56 AM, dann frazier <dannf@dannf.org> wrote:
> > > Probably. debian-ports is the only other option I know of - but it
> > > means we need people to step up and do random bits of release work
> > > (keeping a working installer, etc). I also think we'd need to have
> > > some notion of a "stable" release - I don't think an unstable-only
> > > release is very useful outside of a developer's basement, and not
> > > something I'd want to host our infrastructure systems on.
> > >
> > > Since I don't see that happening, yes, Gentoo.
> > >
> > 
> > We need like 3-4 more people on the project to properly support
> > debian-ports for hppa. I don't think that type of support is going to
> > materialize any time soon.
> 
> It's unclear whether any volunteer support for hppa remains within
> "debian".  I added the parisc-linux list to the cc list to make people
> aware of the situation.
> 
> Aside from the issue about releases, the buildd process is stuck
> due to unresolved dependencies.  Maybe it should be shutdown to
> preserve state.

Stuck? Why do you say that? We are only building updates for lenny
currently, and that seems to be working just fine.

> > Therefore I think Gentoo is probably the best option for the community.
> > 
> > I don't care how we achieve a sustainable distribution for hppa, only
> > that we continue to provide value to our user community.
> 
> There is some hppa work still being done in Gentoo, so I tend to agree
> but I have no direct experience with it.
> 
> Dave

Re: debian hppa

[John David Anglin]

> > Aside from the issue about releases, the buildd process is stuck
> > due to unresolved dependencies.  Maybe it should be shutdown to
> > preserve state.
> 
> Stuck? Why do you say that? We are only building updates for lenny
> currently, and that seems to be working just fine.

I was referring to unstable on debian-ports.

I setup per this message:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-hppa/2011/05/msg00002.html
A few packages updated but nothing has updated in the last
couple of days.

See:
http://buildd.debian-ports.org/stats/hppa.txt

Dave
-- 
J. David Anglin                                  dave.anglin@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca
National Research Council of Canada              (613) 990-0752 (FAX: 952-6602)

Re: debian hppa

[dann frazier]

On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 02:18:41PM -0400, John David Anglin wrote:
> > > Aside from the issue about releases, the buildd process is stuck
> > > due to unresolved dependencies.  Maybe it should be shutdown to
> > > preserve state.
> > 
> > Stuck? Why do you say that? We are only building updates for lenny
> > currently, and that seems to be working just fine.
> 
> I was referring to unstable on debian-ports.
> 
> I setup per this message:
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-hppa/2011/05/msg00002.html
> A few packages updated but nothing has updated in the last
> couple of days.
> 
> See:
> http://buildd.debian-ports.org/stats/hppa.txt

There are no buildds configured for building debian-ports yet, as far
as I know.

Re: debian hppa

[John David Anglin]

On Fri, 27 May 2011, dann frazier wrote:

> There are no buildds configured for building debian-ports yet, as far
> as I know.

Will this happen?

Dave
-- 
J. David Anglin                                  dave.anglin@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca
National Research Council of Canada              (613) 990-0752 (FAX: 952-6602)

Re: debian hppa

[dann frazier]

On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 04:20:46PM -0400, John David Anglin wrote:
> On Fri, 27 May 2011, dann frazier wrote:
> 
> > There are no buildds configured for building debian-ports yet, as far
> > as I know.
> 
> Will this happen?

If there is interest/people willing to work towards maintaining a
stable release off of debian-ports, I can setup/manage buildds to do
so. But, I personally don't have interest in maintaining systems that
run an unstable-only port.

Re: debian hppa

[John David Anglin]

> On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 04:20:46PM -0400, John David Anglin wrote:
> > On Fri, 27 May 2011, dann frazier wrote:
> > 
> > > There are no buildds configured for building debian-ports yet, as far
> > > as I know.
> > 
> > Will this happen?
> 
> If there is interest/people willing to work towards maintaining a
> stable release off of debian-ports, I can setup/manage buildds to do
> so. But, I personally don't have interest in maintaining systems that
> run an unstable-only port.

I am willing to help within the limits of my free time (evenings and
weekends).

Dave
-- 
J. David Anglin                                  dave.anglin@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca
National Research Council of Canada              (613) 990-0752 (FAX: 952-6602)

Re: debian hppa

[Thibaut VARENE]

On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 1:37 AM, John David Anglin
<dave@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> wrote:
>> On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 04:20:46PM -0400, John David Anglin wrote:
>> > On Fri, 27 May 2011, dann frazier wrote:
>> >
>> > > There are no buildds configured for building debian-ports yet, as far
>> > > as I know.
>> >
>> > Will this happen?
>>
>> If there is interest/people willing to work towards maintaining a
>> stable release off of debian-ports, I can setup/manage buildds to do
>> so. But, I personally don't have interest in maintaining systems that
>> run an unstable-only port.
>
> I am willing to help within the limits of my free time (evenings and
> weekends).

I'm willing to provide access to hardware (machines listed under
"ESIEE testring" on http://www.fr.parisc-linux.org/cluster.html -
which needs update btw as the cupertino testring is no more) for as
long as it'll be usable with Debian. I have zero interest in Gentoo
(essentially for technical and practical reasons which are outside the
scope of this email) and will not migrate to it. That means that if
debian(-ports)/hppa is no more and I have to reclaim some rackspace in
the datacenter I manage, the parisc machines will likely be the first
to go away... I'll let people know if/whenever this happens, so that
pickups can be arranged if need be.

BTW, I'm still running 2.6.22.19 on most these machines, and I've kind
of lost track: do we have a known better kernel I could safely upgrade
to?

HTH
T-Bone

-- 
Thibaut VARENE
http://www.parisc-linux.org/~varenet/

Re: debian hppa

[John David Anglin]

On Sat, 28 May 2011, Thibaut VARENE wrote:

> I'm willing to provide access to hardware (machines listed under
> "ESIEE testring" on http://www.fr.parisc-linux.org/cluster.html -
> which needs update btw as the cupertino testring is no more) for as
> long as it'll be usable with Debian. I have zero interest in Gentoo
> (essentially for technical and practical reasons which are outside the
> scope of this email) and will not migrate to it. That means that if
> debian(-ports)/hppa is no more and I have to reclaim some rackspace in
> the datacenter I manage, the parisc machines will likely be the first
> to go away... I'll let people know if/whenever this happens, so that
> pickups can be arranged if need be.

I personally think it is worth trying to work toward one last linux
3.x release for hppa.  This release would have to be installable via CD
or network.

The release would be based on current tools and a somewhat limited
application set, as it is clear that we don't have the person power
for a complete debian release.  As Carlos indicated, users can compile
from source if they need something special.  The focus would be server
oriented.

With this in mind, I think it best to consider how the available hardware
can be utilized to achieve this goal.  In addition, to the ESIEE testring,
I believe that HP made available a number of machines for running their
buildds process.  Dan can probably tell us what the current status is for
these machines.

I'm not sure what the status of the Cupertino machines is and whether
any of the distributed machines will be available for this purpose.

Unfortunately, I can't open the machines that I have at NRC because of
NRC IT security policies.  At the moment, most of the available cycles on
these machines is allocated to GCC testing.  Possibly, some GCC support
could be refocused to provide more support to a Debian release.

> BTW, I'm still running 2.6.22.19 on most these machines, and I've kind
> of lost track: do we have a known better kernel I could safely upgrade
> to?

For the rp3440, the answer is definitely yes.  Unfortunately, 2.6.39
stable doesn't have the pata_cmd64x patch needed for DVD drive, or
James' latest cache fix.  So, I moved on.

I think the random segfault issue present on pa8800 and pa8900 machines
is largely fixed in 3.0.0-rc1, but it is clear linux kernels are much like
wine.  I think USB support for the rp3440 is broken and causes HPMCs.
So, I have it disabled.

At this time, there is no released stable kernel that I consider reliable
on hppa.  However, most recent kernel releases work ok on UP machines.
Of course, my testing tends to be with CPU intensive applications.

I am convinced that the rapid development methodology used by linux isn't
suited to ports with limited support.  Ideally, we should pick the next
kernel designated for longterm support and patch it.

For your other machines, the cache issues are less severe because
they support non equivalent aliasing.  However, don't throw away 2.6.22.19
because udev-266 is broken without libc6-2.13.  Installing udev-266
without libc6-2.13 will crash your machine at boot if your kernel uses
udev.  USB support is broken without it, so recovery can be tricky.

I would say your other machines need updating even if the process is
somewhat rocky as that's the only way a broadbased release can be tested.

Dave
-- 
J. David Anglin                                  dave.anglin@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca
National Research Council of Canada              (613) 990-0752 (FAX: 952-6602)

Re: debian hppa

[Grant Grundler]

On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 10:10:50PM -0400, John David Anglin wrote:
...
> With this in mind, I think it best to consider how the available hardware
> can be utilized to achieve this goal.  In addition, to the ESIEE testring,
> I believe that HP made available a number of machines for running their
> buildds process.  Dan can probably tell us what the current status is for
> these machines.
> 
> I'm not sure what the status of the Cupertino machines is and whether
> any of the distributed machines will be available for this purpose.

Cupertino Test Ring is gone. The entire Cupertino site (multiple acres)
was sold to Apple. If someone can secure external network access at
HP Labs in Palo Alto, I can help build a new 'Test rack'.

> Unfortunately, I can't open the machines that I have at NRC because of
> NRC IT security policies.  At the moment, most of the available cycles on
> these machines is allocated to GCC testing.  Possibly, some GCC support
> could be refocused to provide more support to a Debian release.

As discussed off list a few months ago, HW salvaged from the Cupertino
Test Ring should be headed your way in the near future.

hth,
grant

Re: debian hppa

[John David Anglin]

Hi Grant,

On Thu, 02 Jun 2011, Grant Grundler wrote:

> As discussed off list a few months ago, HW salvaged from the Cupertino
> Test Ring should be headed your way in the near future.

I learned Monday that NRC wasn't going renew to my guest appointment.
There have been problems with some other appointments at HIA.

NRC has a new President and major changes are occuring within the
organization.  Guest Worker appointments now have to be approved by
NRC legal and a VP, so they are much more difficult and visible.
It seems to take months for an appointment to be processed.  There
are concerns about liability, IP, etc.

It's still not clear whether I end now or at the end of December.
I plan to take home the rp3440 and c3750 at NRC.  That's about all
that I can fit in my office at home.  I might fit another server
with internal drives on top of the rp3440, but that's about it.

I can continue some Linux GCC support from home, but there is no room
anymore for HP-UX.

If HP hasn't shipped the Cup stuff, probably the matter should be reviewed.

Regards,
Dave
-- 
J. David Anglin                                  dave.anglin@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca
National Research Council of Canada              (613) 990-0752 (FAX: 952-6602)

Re: debian hppa

[Grant Grundler]

On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 03:33:47PM -0400, John David Anglin wrote:
> Hi Grant,
> 
> On Thu, 02 Jun 2011, Grant Grundler wrote:
> 
> > As discussed off list a few months ago, HW salvaged from the Cupertino
> > Test Ring should be headed your way in the near future.
> 
> I learned Monday that NRC wasn't going renew to my guest appointment.
> There have been problems with some other appointments at HIA.
> 
> NRC has a new President and major changes are occuring within the
> organization.  Guest Worker appointments now have to be approved by
> NRC legal and a VP, so they are much more difficult and visible.
> It seems to take months for an appointment to be processed.  There
> are concerns about liability, IP, etc.

That's unfortunate. :(

> It's still not clear whether I end now or at the end of December.
> I plan to take home the rp3440 and c3750 at NRC.  That's about all
> that I can fit in my office at home.  I might fit another server
> with internal drives on top of the rp3440, but that's about it.

Ok.

> I can continue some Linux GCC support from home, but there is no room
> anymore for HP-UX.
> 
> If HP hasn't shipped the Cup stuff, probably the matter should be reviewed.

I thought it was but don't know if Rick (CC'd) was able to find a contact
in HP (Kanata or anything near Ottawa) to handle transfer.

Thanks!
grant

Re: debian hppa

[rick jones]

I've been letting myself get distracted by "the day job" wrt getting equipment shipped to Canada :( But am still willing to give it a go if there is still a destination.

rick jones
there is no rest for the wicked, yet the virtuous have no pillows

Re: debian hppa

[John David Anglin]

On 3-Jul-11, at 11:33 AM, rick jones wrote:

> I've been letting myself get distracted by "the day job" wrt getting  
> equipment shipped to Canada :( But am still willing to give it a go  
> if there is still a destination.

Let's hold off a bit until I get a response from the VP.  Possibly, I  
could share stuff with Carlos
if NRC doesn't work out.

Dave

Re: debian hppa

[Thibaut VARENE]

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 4:10 AM, John David Anglin
<dave@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> wrote:
> On Sat, 28 May 2011, Thibaut VARENE wrote:

Sorry for the late answer, I got slightly off-track lately.

>> BTW, I'm still running 2.6.22.19 on most these machines, and I've ki=
nd
>> of lost track: do we have a known better kernel I could safely upgra=
de
>> to?
>
> For the rp3440, the answer is definitely yes. =C2=A0Unfortunately, 2.=
6.39
> stable doesn't have the pata_cmd64x patch needed for DVD drive, or
> James' latest cache fix. =C2=A0So, I moved on.
>
> I think the random segfault issue present on pa8800 and pa8900 machin=
es
> is largely fixed in 3.0.0-rc1, but it is clear linux kernels are much=
 like
> wine. =C2=A0I think USB support for the rp3440 is broken and causes H=
PMCs.
> So, I have it disabled.

So, I'm not sure what to make of it: what would be the preferred
stable SMP kernel for pa8800/8900 machines as of now? Note I'm not
using udev anymore on any of my machines.

> At this time, there is no released stable kernel that I consider reli=
able
> on hppa. =C2=A0However, most recent kernel releases work ok on UP mac=
hines.
> Of course, my testing tends to be with CPU intensive applications.
>
> I am convinced that the rapid development methodology used by linux i=
sn't
> suited to ports with limited support. =C2=A0Ideally, we should pick t=
he next
> kernel designated for longterm support and patch it.

I've been making similar claims in the past, so I can only concur.
Unfortunately the time I can personally devote to palinux is
asymptotically nearing 0 ;P

> For your other machines, the cache issues are less severe because
> they support non equivalent aliasing. =C2=A0However, don't throw away=
 2.6.22.19
> because udev-266 is broken without libc6-2.13. =C2=A0Installing udev-=
266
> without libc6-2.13 will crash your machine at boot if your kernel use=
s
> udev. =C2=A0USB support is broken without it, so recovery can be tric=
ky.

not using udev anymore, after having had to face too many breakages to
remember, and deeming udev useless on headless with servers
non-hotswapable hardware anyway...

> I would say your other machines need updating even if the process is
> somewhat rocky as that's the only way a broadbased release can be tes=
ted.

Well I can assign one machine (the a500, being easy to reboot/fix as
it is) to testing kernels, but for a stable kernel suitable for the
machines I'm e.g. assigning to the GCC Compile Farm[0], what would be
a good SMP kernel version to choose? I'm looking for the same level of
hassle-freeness as 2.6.22.19 since these machines are under relatively
heavy load and I cannot afford to tend to their care on a daily basis
;-)

Thanks for your help!

T-Bone

[0] http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/CompileFarm

--=20
Thibaut VARENE
http://www.parisc-linux.org/~varenet/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-parisc"=
 in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: debian hppa

[John David Anglin]

Hi Thibaut,

On 13-Jun-11, at 6:19 PM, Thibaut VARENE wrote:

>> I would say your other machines need updating even if the process is
>> somewhat rocky as that's the only way a broadbased release can be  
>> tested.
>
> Well I can assign one machine (the a500, being easy to reboot/fix as
> it is) to testing kernels, but for a stable kernel suitable for the
> machines I'm e.g. assigning to the GCC Compile Farm[0], what would be
> a good SMP kernel version to choose? I'm looking for the same level of
> hassle-freeness as 2.6.22.19 since these machines are under relatively
> heavy load and I cannot afford to tend to their care on a daily basis
> ;-)

Sorry for the delay in responding.  I think assigning the a500 to the  
GCC farm
provides good visibility.  For GCC, the kernel version doesn't matter  
much.  The
main issue is stability.

I was wondering if the rp3440 in the ESIEE might be assigned to  
running debian
buildd.  I believe that the current set of known kernel patches will  
make this
machine reasonably stable under medium load.  Carlos recently found a  
big
bug in the kernel futex code.  In any case, I recently successfully  
built many
unstable packages on my rp3440.

I would be willing to help getting this going.

Dave

Re: debian hppa

[Thibaut VARENE]

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 1:20 AM, John David Anglin
<dave.anglin@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca> wrote:
> Hi Thibaut,
>
> On 13-Jun-11, at 6:19 PM, Thibaut VARENE wrote:
>
>>> I would say your other machines need updating even if the process i=
s
>>> somewhat rocky as that's the only way a broadbased release can be t=
ested.
>>
>> Well I can assign one machine (the a500, being easy to reboot/fix as
>> it is) to testing kernels, but for a stable kernel suitable for the
>> machines I'm e.g. assigning to the GCC Compile Farm[0], what would b=
e
>> a good SMP kernel version to choose? I'm looking for the same level =
of
>> hassle-freeness as 2.6.22.19 since these machines are under relative=
ly
>> heavy load and I cannot afford to tend to their care on a daily basi=
s
>> ;-)
>
> Sorry for the delay in responding. =C2=A0I think assigning the a500 t=
o the GCC
> farm
> provides good visibility. =C2=A0For GCC, the kernel version doesn't m=
atter much.
> =C2=A0The
> main issue is stability.

OK, so I suppose it's fine to stick with 2.6.22.19? I thought there
were issues with un-implemented syscalls and such, so I don't really
know...

> I was wondering if the rp3440 in the ESIEE might be assigned to runni=
ng
> debian
> buildd. =C2=A0I believe that the current set of known kernel patches =
will make
> this
> machine reasonably stable under medium load. =C2=A0Carlos recently fo=
und a big
> bug in the kernel futex code. =C2=A0In any case, I recently successfu=
lly built
> many
> unstable packages on my rp3440.
>
> I would be willing to help getting this going.

I have no problem with this, the only "active" user of the rp3440 is
Aur=C3=A9lien, so I suppose it wouldn't be a problem. Yet, my understan=
ding
is that the rp3440 is extremely slow at building anything (much slower
than my other machines, it seems) because of the cache flush issues.
AIUI that's why Debian stuck to J6700 for buildds, because those
machines were a lot faster.

Other than that, the rp3440 currently runs unstable with 2.6.22.19, so
I suppose a complete reinstall would be in order, and I'm not sure I
have time to deal with that just yet. I'd be happy to provide remote
access to the machine though, if someone steps up. FWIW, the only
machine I have left running lenny is a J5000, 2x440MHz PA8500,
previously used as an autobuilder for debian-multimedia.org.

HTH,
T-Bone

--=20
Thibaut VARENE
http://www.parisc-linux.org/~varenet/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-parisc"=
 in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: debian hppa

[Carlos O'Donell]

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Thibaut VARENE <T-Bone@parisc-linux.or=
g> wrote:
> I have no problem with this, the only "active" user of the rp3440 is
> Aur=E9lien, so I suppose it wouldn't be a problem. Yet, my understand=
ing
> is that the rp3440 is extremely slow at building anything (much slowe=
r
> than my other machines, it seems) because of the cache flush issues.
> AIUI that's why Debian stuck to J6700 for buildds, because those
> machines were a lot faster.
>
> Other than that, the rp3440 currently runs unstable with 2.6.22.19, s=
o
> I suppose a complete reinstall would be in order, and I'm not sure I
> have time to deal with that just yet. I'd be happy to provide remote
> access to the machine though, if someone steps up. FWIW, the only
> machine I have left running lenny is a J5000, 2x440MHz PA8500,
> previously used as an autobuilder for debian-multimedia.org.

I can do the install and help monitor the box.

Aurelien,

Exactly what do we need installed for debian-ports?

Cheers,
Carlos.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-parisc"=
 in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: debian hppa

[Aurelien Jarno]

On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 12:03:48PM -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Thibaut VARENE <T-Bone@parisc-linux.=
org> wrote:
> > I have no problem with this, the only "active" user of the rp3440 i=
s
> > Aur=E9lien, so I suppose it wouldn't be a problem. Yet, my understa=
nding
> > is that the rp3440 is extremely slow at building anything (much slo=
wer
> > than my other machines, it seems) because of the cache flush issues=
=2E
> > AIUI that's why Debian stuck to J6700 for buildds, because those
> > machines were a lot faster.
> >
> > Other than that, the rp3440 currently runs unstable with 2.6.22.19,=
 so
> > I suppose a complete reinstall would be in order, and I'm not sure =
I
> > have time to deal with that just yet. I'd be happy to provide remot=
e
> > access to the machine though, if someone steps up. FWIW, the only
> > machine I have left running lenny is a J5000, 2x440MHz PA8500,
> > previously used as an autobuilder for debian-multimedia.org.
>=20
> I can do the install and help monitor the box.
>=20
> Aurelien,
>=20
> Exactly what do we need installed for debian-ports?
>=20

All the list of things to provide for debian-ports are available from m=
y
previous post back in April:

  http://lists.debian.org/debian-hppa/2011/04/msg00026.html

Please note that the first point is not relevant anymore given that I
have done the import myself:

  http://lists.debian.org/debian-hppa/2011/05/msg00002.html

--=20
Aurelien Jarno	                        GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73
aurelien@aurel32.net                 http://www.aurel32.net
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-parisc"=
 in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: debian hppa

[Carlos O'Donell]

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 5:59 PM, Aurelien Jarno <aurel32@debian.org> wro=
te:
> All the list of things to provide for debian-ports are available from=
 my
> previous post back in April:
>
> =A0http://lists.debian.org/debian-hppa/2011/04/msg00026.html
>
> Please note that the first point is not relevant anymore given that I
> have done the import myself:
>
> =A0http://lists.debian.org/debian-hppa/2011/05/msg00002.html

- A place/way to fetch all the .deb that have to be import with the
  corresponding .changes.

This is done.

- List of persons who need to have access to the wanna-build interface.
  If some of them are not DD, please also provide mail/login/ssh key.

I would like to have access to the wanna-build interface.

I will have Dann Frazier send you my mail/login/ssh key as a signed ema=
il.

- List of persons who should be able to upload packages to the archive
  with the corresponding GPG keys (that should include buildds
  maintainers).

I will have Dann Frazier send you my GPG key in the same signed email.

- List of emails to be used as a contact point for alpha/hppa buildds
  and alpha/hppa related things.

In the email from Dann.

- List of buildds with their IP, SSH key and mail address.

What do you want installed on the buildds?

I've setup a buildd before, but the truth is that I had to crib the
information from various sources.

Is there actually a guide for this available anywhere?

Cheers,
Carlos.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-parisc"=
 in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: debian hppa

[Aurelien Jarno]

On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 07:02:28PM -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 5:59 PM, Aurelien Jarno <aurel32@debian.org> w=
rote:
> > All the list of things to provide for debian-ports are available fr=
om my
> > previous post back in April:
> >
> > =A0http://lists.debian.org/debian-hppa/2011/04/msg00026.html
> >
> > Please note that the first point is not relevant anymore given that=
 I
> > have done the import myself:
> >
> > =A0http://lists.debian.org/debian-hppa/2011/05/msg00002.html
>=20
> - A place/way to fetch all the .deb that have to be import with the
>   corresponding .changes.
>=20
> This is done.
>=20
> - List of persons who need to have access to the wanna-build interfac=
e.
>   If some of them are not DD, please also provide mail/login/ssh key.
>=20
> I would like to have access to the wanna-build interface.
>=20
> I will have Dann Frazier send you my mail/login/ssh key as a signed e=
mail.

Ok, will create that when I get the mail.

> - List of persons who should be able to upload packages to the archiv=
e
>   with the corresponding GPG keys (that should include buildds
>   maintainers).
>=20
> I will have Dann Frazier send you my GPG key in the same signed email=
=2E

Ditto.

> - List of emails to be used as a contact point for alpha/hppa buildds
>   and alpha/hppa related things.
>=20
> In the email from Dann.

Ditto.
=20
> - List of buildds with their IP, SSH key and mail address.
>=20
> What do you want installed on the buildds?

I personally don't really want to get anything installed. But to be
useful a buildd needs to be able to connect to the wanna-build db, send
the build logs, receive signed build logs by mail and upload packages.

> I've setup a buildd before, but the truth is that I had to crib the
> information from various sources.
>=20
> Is there actually a guide for this available anywhere?
>=20

You can use the setup guide from [1]. Basically you should change=20
debian.org by debian-ports.org and use the following sources.list
(or any of the corresponding mirrors [2]):

  deb http://ftp.debian-ports.org/debian sid main
  deb http://ftp.debian-ports.org/debian unreleased main
  deb-src http://ftp.debian.org/debian/ unstable main

  deb http://incoming.debian-ports.org/buildd unstable main
  deb-src http://incoming.debian-ports.org/buildd unstable main

Cheers,
Aurelien
 =20
[1] https://buildd.debian.org/docs/
[2] http://www.debian-ports.org/mirrors

--=20
Aurelien Jarno	                        GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73
aurelien@aurel32.net                 http://www.aurel32.net
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-parisc"=
 in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: debian hppa

[John David Anglin]

On 7/7/2011 11:49 AM, Thibaut VARENE wrote:
>
> I have no problem with this, the only "active" user of the rp3440 is
> Aur=C3=A9lien, so I suppose it wouldn't be a problem. Yet, my underst=
anding
> is that the rp3440 is extremely slow at building anything (much slowe=
r
> than my other machines, it seems) because of the cache flush issues.
> AIUI that's why Debian stuck to J6700 for buildds, because those
> machines were a lot faster.

The rp3440 isn't bad for non trivial compilations.  At -j4, my 800 MHz=20
rp3440 is the fastest
machine that I have for building GCC.  It stumbles running the testsuit=
e=20
where it falls behind
my c3750.  The cache flush problem slows forks.  If this could be=20
resolved, the machine
could handle significantly larger loads than the J6700.

> Other than that, the rp3440 currently runs unstable with 2.6.22.19, s=
o
> I suppose a complete reinstall would be in order, and I'm not sure I
> have time to deal with that just yet. I'd be happy to provide remote
> access to the machine though, if someone steps up. FWIW, the only
> machine I have left running lenny is a J5000, 2x440MHz PA8500,
> previously used as an autobuilder for debian-multimedia.org.
The kernel on the rp3440 needs updating.  2.6.22.19 is not stable under=
=20
load.  To do this,
remote access to the console would be needed.  Many bugs have been fixe=
d=20
since
2.6.22.19, and I think many packages may not test successfully without=20
updating the
kernel and build environment.

I have done this manually on my rp3440 for quite a few packages.

Dave

--=20
John David Anglin    dave.anglin@bell.net

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-parisc"=
 in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: debian hppa

[Thibaut VARENE]

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 6:16 PM, John David Anglin <dave.anglin@bell.net=
> wrote:


> The kernel on the rp3440 needs updating. =C2=A02.6.22.19 is not stabl=
e under
> load. =C2=A0To do this,
> remote access to the console would be needed. =C2=A0Many bugs have be=
en fixed

Carlos has access to the ESIEE cluster already. I can set you up as
well, I just need a ssh pubkey and a preferred login.

HTH
T-Bone
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-parisc"=
 in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: debian hppa

[dann frazier]

On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 05:49:36PM +0200, Thibaut VARENE wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 1:20 AM, John David Anglin
> <dave.anglin@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca> wrote:
> > Hi Thibaut,
> >
> > On 13-Jun-11, at 6:19 PM, Thibaut VARENE wrote:
> >
> >>> I would say your other machines need updating even if the process=
 is
> >>> somewhat rocky as that's the only way a broadbased release can be=
 tested.
> >>
> >> Well I can assign one machine (the a500, being easy to reboot/fix =
as
> >> it is) to testing kernels, but for a stable kernel suitable for th=
e
> >> machines I'm e.g. assigning to the GCC Compile Farm[0], what would=
 be
> >> a good SMP kernel version to choose? I'm looking for the same leve=
l of
> >> hassle-freeness as 2.6.22.19 since these machines are under relati=
vely
> >> heavy load and I cannot afford to tend to their care on a daily ba=
sis
> >> ;-)
> >
> > Sorry for the delay in responding. =A0I think assigning the a500 to=
 the GCC
> > farm
> > provides good visibility. =A0For GCC, the kernel version doesn't ma=
tter much.
> > =A0The
> > main issue is stability.
>=20
> OK, so I suppose it's fine to stick with 2.6.22.19? I thought there
> were issues with un-implemented syscalls and such, so I don't really
> know...
>=20
> > I was wondering if the rp3440 in the ESIEE might be assigned to run=
ning
> > debian
> > buildd. =A0I believe that the current set of known kernel patches w=
ill make
> > this
> > machine reasonably stable under medium load. =A0Carlos recently fou=
nd a big
> > bug in the kernel futex code. =A0In any case, I recently successful=
ly built
> > many
> > unstable packages on my rp3440.
> >
> > I would be willing to help getting this going.
>=20
> I have no problem with this, the only "active" user of the rp3440 is
> Aur=E9lien, so I suppose it wouldn't be a problem. Yet, my understand=
ing
> is that the rp3440 is extremely slow at building anything (much slowe=
r
> than my other machines, it seems) because of the cache flush issues.
> AIUI that's why Debian stuck to J6700 for buildds, because those
> machines were a lot faster.

I don't think speed was really a concern - it was more hardware
availability and some hand-wavy belief that these machines would be
more stable.

Honestly, the most reliable build machine I've used is my
C3700. I don't recall ever having any build issues with
that. Anything it gives up in speed is definitely outweighed by
having to e.g. retry gcc 5 times before succeeding. By the end of the
port, I'd normally handbuild new gcc uploads here to avoid thrashing
on the real buildds. If given the option, I'd recommend 3 of those
boxes for a buildd ring.

> Other than that, the rp3440 currently runs unstable with 2.6.22.19, s=
o
> I suppose a complete reinstall would be in order, and I'm not sure I
> have time to deal with that just yet. I'd be happy to provide remote
> access to the machine though, if someone steps up. FWIW, the only
> machine I have left running lenny is a J5000, 2x440MHz PA8500,
> previously used as an autobuilder for debian-multimedia.org.
>=20
> HTH,
> T-Bone
>=20
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-parisc"=
 in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: debian hppa

[John David Anglin]

On 7/7/2011 12:18 PM, dann frazier wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 05:49:36PM +0200, Thibaut VARENE wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 1:20 AM, John David Anglin
>> <dave.anglin@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca>  wrote:
>>> Hi Thibaut,
>>>
>>> On 13-Jun-11, at 6:19 PM, Thibaut VARENE wrote:
>>>
>>>>> I would say your other machines need updating even if the process is
>>>>> somewhat rocky as that's the only way a broadbased release can be tested.
>>>> Well I can assign one machine (the a500, being easy to reboot/fix as
>>>> it is) to testing kernels, but for a stable kernel suitable for the
>>>> machines I'm e.g. assigning to the GCC Compile Farm[0], what would be
>>>> a good SMP kernel version to choose? I'm looking for the same level of
>>>> hassle-freeness as 2.6.22.19 since these machines are under relatively
>>>> heavy load and I cannot afford to tend to their care on a daily basis
>>>> ;-)
>>> Sorry for the delay in responding.  I think assigning the a500 to the GCC
>>> farm
>>> provides good visibility.  For GCC, the kernel version doesn't matter much.
>>>   The
>>> main issue is stability.
>> OK, so I suppose it's fine to stick with 2.6.22.19? I thought there
>> were issues with un-implemented syscalls and such, so I don't really
>> know...
>>
This comment was specific to building and testing GCC.  It currently 
takes slightly over
24 hours to build and test GCC trunk on my c3750.

> Honestly, the most reliable build machine I've used is my
> C3700. I don't recall ever having any build issues with
> that. Anything it gives up in speed is definitely outweighed by
> having to e.g. retry gcc 5 times before succeeding. By the end of the
> port, I'd normally handbuild new gcc uploads here to avoid thrashing
> on the real buildds. If given the option, I'd recommend 3 of those
> boxes for a buildd ring.
>
Based on my testing, it's no longer necessary to try 5 times before 
succeeding with rp3440.
I agree that the C37XX machines are very stable and don't suffer from 
the SMP/cache
issues present in the servers.  If the ring above could be arranged, 
that would be excellent.

Dave

-- 
John David Anglin    dave.anglin@bell.net

Re: debian hppa

[Carlos O'Donell]

On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 5:35 PM, dann frazier <dannf@dannf.org> wrote:
> On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 04:20:46PM -0400, John David Anglin wrote:
>> On Fri, 27 May 2011, dann frazier wrote:
>>
>> > There are no buildds configured for building debian-ports yet, as far
>> > as I know.
>>
>> Will this happen?
>
> If there is interest/people willing to work towards maintaining a
> stable release off of debian-ports, I can setup/manage buildds to do
> so. But, I personally don't have interest in maintaining systems that
> run an unstable-only port.

FAOD. I think we will want to maintain a stable/testing release off of
debian-ports, and I'll step up to maintain that.

First though I think as an exercise to the reader we need to get our
machines setup and rolling with unstable to ensure we can continue to
build packages.

Cheers,
Carlos.