Ardour3 architecture list

[Felipe Sateler]

On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 10:40 AM, Jonas Smedegaard <dr at jones.dk> wrote:
> Quoting Felipe Sateler (2014-07-11 15:55:34)
>> On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 3:06 AM, Jonas Smedegaard <dr at jones.dk> wrote:
>>> Quoting Felipe Sateler (2014-07-10 17:12:34)
>>>> Ardour3 takes a long time to build. The mips and mipsel buildds
>>>> killed the build after 150 and 300 minutes of inactivity. I managed
>>>> to build ardour3 in the mipsel porterbox, so I don't think ardour
>>>> has any real problem on mipsel. I was wondering if maybe we should
>>>> restrict ardour to the architectures it is likely to be used.
>>>> Otherwise we might need to ask that ardour be retried until it
>>>> manages to print output fast enough to avoid getting killed.
>>>>
>>>> What do you think?
>>>
>>> I think we should not decide based on where it is likely to be used,
>>> but here is is possible to use.
>>
>> In an ideal world, I would agree. But manpower is very short in the
>> team, so prioritizing is of the essence. Spending time on ensuring
>> builds on an architecture (close to) nobody uses is not a very good
>> use of it.
>>
>> But, if you have a suggestion to ensure the build doesn't time out,
>> I'm all ears :)
>
> Maybe I failed to understand, but seems to me that asking th ardour
> build to be retired until not myeriously hanging on porter boxes is not
> burdening man power (of the Multimedia team) but instead putting the
> burden on the porting team where it belongs.

The burden is on us due to having to track down a missing build. But
most importantly it is a burden on our users because until the mipsel
build is up again, ardour3 cannot migrate to testing.

>
> I find it wrong of us to try second-guess interests of Debian users.
>
> Particularly, looking at popularity contest is wrong here, IMO, as that
> a) is generally inaccurate (contributions to it is voluntary and only
> reflects internet-connected hosts) and b) tells only about past usage
> patterns, not interests-if-available for next release of Debian and the
> hardware that will then be supported.

In general, I agree. I would love to be able to provide all packages
in all archs. But it may not be feasible due to time constraints.

> ...but to address your concrete question: I do not have ideas how to
> reliably avoid builds hanging, but if not already tried I do have a
> suggestion for that: Ask the porters, as it seems you have narrowed the
> issue to be architecture-dependent (if not, then so much more reason
> against treating it as such!).

The problem, as far as I can see, is that the build takes too long. I
built ardour3 in eder (a mipsel porterbox) successfully, and it took
over 12 hours!

If you look at the log I linked to, the build daemon killed the build
after some time without activity.


-- 

Saludos,
Felipe Sateler