 |
 |
Malcolm J. Currie wrote: >> I think it may be time to update some of the systems at RAL too (with >> Malcolm's assistance), for future ease of maintenance (nothing gets > > I'd be glad to help. When would you like to start? > > Last year I discussed the question of nightly build machines with > Matthew Wild (our part-time sys admin), and he advocated buying a > multi-processor server machine to run many virtual machines, each with a > different OS. > I tried the VMware virtual machine stuff with the nightly builds, wasn't too successful, but it may be simpler now (plus VMware server is free). Matthew has done some work with the Xen stuff, but it would appear to me that Xen only supports a limited number of Linux distributions. OK for servers, not too good for development. Who pays for the new box? >> updated here any more). Any preferences on Linux versions for the >> nightly builds? > > I do have some notes when I consult the system managers, but you may > regard those as being stale. > > Note, apart from some specialist build systems, most of >> the RAL systems will be updated to "Ubuntu 6.06 LTS Server - Supported >> to 2011" (it is the one I know most about these days). > > Hmm Matthew seems to be more inclined to CentOS than Ubuntu. > Who will be doing the updating? Me. But if he wants to update everything to CentOS and keep things patched, that is fine by me. I should say that I want to build up a good development infrastructure for the CASPAR/DCC stuff I work on, but the Starlink stuff can sit happily within it with very little extra effort. >> Pluto will still >> be OSX. There are also some new Sparc systems that may be worth having >> as Open Solaris or I could put Ubuntu server on them or both. > > Re. new SPARC systems, are these faster? The current Solaris 9 builds > are taking too long for the daily cycle. It's only getting worse with > new and larger packages plus more documents to build. > And that is why I suggested it. The new SPARC systems are much faster. >> I would also like to reduce the number of login systems for Starlink >> related stuff to one system. That system will hold the mirror of the SVN >> and the website etc. > > This might be where Matt is coming from too. Fewer systems equals > less maintenance. > Yes. Also more secure. My intention was to have the build systems on a private network with one server acting as a gateway. > Malcolm