Re: armhf build machines

[Mark H Weaver]

address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) writes:

> Leo Famulari <address@hidden> 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 the 
>>> > 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 
>>> > Raspberry
>>> > Pi 2 isn't great, but in terms of cost its pretty inexpensive.  Is this
>>> > something we'd be interested in?
>>> 
>>> 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 machine
>>> 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.

    Thanks,
      Mark