From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark H Weaver Subject: Re: wip-armhf branch ready for wider testing Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 13:16:51 -0500 Message-ID: <87bnluws8c.fsf@netris.org> References: <87wq544xjl.fsf@netris.org> <87r3vbadft.fsf@gnu.org> <20150118221223.GA19598@debian> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35778) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YDGt0-0005qK-AR for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 13:17:16 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YDGsv-0005Zj-7I for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 13:17:14 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20150118221223.GA19598@debian> (Andreas Enge's message of "Sun, 18 Jan 2015 23:12:23 +0100") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Andreas Enge Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Andreas Enge writes: > On Sat, Jan 03, 2015 at 08:09:42PM +0100, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: >> Congrats on all the progress made! > > These are good news indeed! > >> It would be nice to have a couple of build machines for this platform. >> If anyone reading this wants to help, please let us know! > > On which kind of machines does this armhf run? Is it related to the output > of "uname -m"? Our armhf targets the same set of machines as Debian's armhf, namely the ARMv7-A architecture with VFP3D16 coprocessor. So 'uname -m' must output "armv7l" or better, and I guess the processor "Features" as reported by /proc/cpuinfo must include "vfpv3" and either "vfpd16" or "vfpd32". > I have a raspberry pi that identifies as "armv6l", and a seagate > goflex that identifies as "armv5tel". I suppose both are too old to > run armhf? Right, they can't run armhf. Also, a build slave should have 1 GB RAM minimum (preferably 2) and reasonably well performing storage (i.e. SATA not SD). So, I think Beaglebone Black and other systems in that class will not be sufficient. I think we need ARM board(s) with performance comparable to the Novena. The Novena itself would be a fine option, but I'm not willing to give mine up for that task :) Mark