From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr>
Subject: Re: Guix on aarch64
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2018 12:00:32 +0200
Message-ID: <20180828100032.GA1973@jurong>
References: <87k1oq6wgf.fsf@jnanam.net> <87bm9tbrx9.fsf@netris.org>
	<87zhxcoy0p.fsf@gnu.org> <87efelw1fr.fsf@netris.org>
	<20180826185922.GB18912@jasmine.lan> <87tvng1bib.fsf@elephly.net>
	<87bm9ntyjh.fsf@netris.org> <87zhx7bohb.fsf@elephly.net>
	<87o9dnsep0.fsf@netris.org> <87r2iic48y.fsf@elephly.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56896)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <andreas@enge.fr>) id 1fuanl-0000lV-Lb
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 06:00:48 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <andreas@enge.fr>) id 1fuang-0002aC-6f
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 06:00:45 -0400
Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([2a0c:e300::1]:47984)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <andreas@enge.fr>) id 1fuanf-0002XI-Vr
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 06:00:40 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87r2iic48y.fsf@elephly.net>
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-devel" <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org, Benjamin Slade <beoram@gmail.com>

Hello,

On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 09:57:49AM +0200, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
> I can remove one of the build machines from Berlin.

would this not aggravate the problem with the availability of substitutes?
As I understand it, then we would have two separate machines, each of
which would build the same packages; and if two machines are not enough
to keep up with the pace of development, with only one things should become
even worse. So if we move machines, maybe we should move both of them for a
little while, until the proposed changes to cuirass and the berlin storage
architecture are implemented?

Or would it make sense to instead disable automatic evaluation of the aarch64
derivations, and to only start them manually for "important" commits?

Andreas