From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: armhf build machines Date: Tue, 08 Dec 2015 18:18:23 +0100 Message-ID: <87fuzc7tb4.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20151207111424.6297eea2@debian-netbook> <20151207103646.GA5390@debian.eduroam.u-bordeaux.fr> <20151207182817.GA24951@jasmine> <87bna1svy1.fsf@gnu.org> <87y4d5zips.fsf@netris.org> 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]:38381) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a6LuK-0000PR-4o for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Dec 2015 12:18:33 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a6LuE-0008Ej-7H for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Dec 2015 12:18:32 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87y4d5zips.fsf@netris.org> (Mark H. Weaver's message of "Mon, 07 Dec 2015 23:07:27 -0500") 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: Mark H Weaver Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Mark H Weaver skribis: > ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) writes: > >> Leo Famulari skribis: >> >>> On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 11:36:46AM +0100, Andreas Enge wrote: >>>> On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 11:14:24AM +0200, Efraim Flashner wrote: >>>> > The impression I got from looking at the build farm thank-yous on th= e website >>>> > was that we have lowered requirements for what we're looking for in = armhf >>>> > build machines, at least in terms of RAM. In terms of freedom the Ra= spberry >>>> > Pi 2 isn't great, but in terms of cost its pretty inexpensive. Is t= his >>>> > something we'd be interested in? >>>>=20 >>>> We are waiting for two new Novena boards that should arrive before the >>>> end of the year. The current bottleneck is not the build machines, but= hydra; >>>> already now the build farm could sustain more jobs in parallel, but we >>>> artificially limit them. So I would say that there is currently no need >>>> to add more build machines. This may change if we get a physical machi= ne >>>> for hydra. >>> >>> What sort of machine would be appropriate for hydra? >> >> Something rather big: say 8+ cores, 16+G RAM, fast disk of 3T at least. > > I would also add that it should run Libreboot, for which the ASUS > KGPE-D16 is currently the best supported server-class motherboard. Right, I would prefer it as well; I hope we can find such rackable servers. If it turns out that all we can buy in practice is an ME-backdoored server, I *might* be willing to take it, with the understanding that it would become less and less of a single point of trust (assuming more of our package builds become reproducible, and other users publish binaries as well.) WDYT? Ludo=E2=80=99.