From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 9 00:52:32 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0EEC106566C for ; Wed, 9 Dec 2009 00:52:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from 000.fbsd@quip.cz) Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (elsa.codelab.cz [94.124.105.4]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F0678FC15 for ; Wed, 9 Dec 2009 00:52:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost.codelab.cz [127.0.0.1]) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33D1919E045; Wed, 9 Dec 2009 01:52:31 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.1.2] (r5bb235.net.upc.cz [86.49.61.235]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EC1DC19E044; Wed, 9 Dec 2009 01:52:28 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4B1EF4CC.9010004@quip.cz> Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2009 01:52:28 +0100 From: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.9.1.4) Gecko/20091017 SeaMonkey/2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Linimon References: <4B1E4351.2030004@gmail.com> <20091208201711.GE3057@lonesome.com> In-Reply-To: <20091208201711.GE3057@lonesome.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Pointyhat packages X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2009 00:52:32 -0000 Mark Linimon wrote: [...] > Two data points: one, it looks like Pav having marked www/p5-Gtk2-WebKit > as broken had already been taken into account for the amd64 build, so it > didn't have that problem. And two, some of our i386 machines are indeed > underpowered. We've added several new, more modern, ones this year that > were donated to us: these are dual 2.4 or 2.8GHz machines, mostly with > 2G of RAM. (One of my background tasks is to try to characterize > performance on the nodes with various setups; my intuition is that 4G > would allow us to raise throughput, but I need to make a 'use case' for > that before I go ask for funding.) > > fwiw, I continually look for new ways to scrounge more package building > nodes (I seem to have inherited the task of looking after them). What is the policy for package building nodes? I mean, is it possible to use some machines not owned directy by FreeBSD.org? For example, I have spare machine in our rack which I can lend for some period (until some production machine goes down and needs to be replaced by this spare machine) or maybe I can set up some older unused machine (IBM x336). Is deploying of new node easy task or is it something special that is not useful to do for relatively short period of time? Miroslav Lachman