Guix infrastructure

[Leo Famulari]

On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 08:09:17PM -0400, myglc2 wrote:
> On 07/01/2017 at 14:01 Leo Famulari writes:
> > ... Bayfront is still not fully operational, so hydra.gnu.org is still
> > serving as the front-end of the build farm. We are still relying on the
> > Hydra software. That is, the situation is basically the same as before.
> > Adding build machines will not help very much until the front-end
> > hardware gets faster.
> 
> This leaves me wondering ...
> 
> Is the hydra/front-end hardware going to be upgraded?

Yes...

> Is bayfront/cuirass intended to replace hydra?

... and yes.

> The bayfront hardware described here ...
> 
> https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/news/growing-our-build-farm.html
> 
> ... seems weak to me. Is there a plan to scale it up and make it redundant?

It will be a lot more powerful than the current Hydra system. As for
specific plans, I'll let those administering the system chime in.

> A reliable, resourced, managed, "nightly Guix build" should pay big
> dividends for the project. But, from reading the lists, I get the
> impression that such a thing does not exist. Is that correct?

Currently, we tend to build all the packages as often as we can with our
resources, which is less than once a day.

> Do we know what would be needed to achieve a complete nightly build?

It depends on what you mean by "complete".

I doubt we can find armhf hardware that could build all the packages
daily. That platform doesn't get very powerful in general and, in my
experience, the machines that do exist can't handle sustained high
loads, nor do they have fast network and I/O interfaces.

It is possible for x86_64, i686, and eventually for aarch64. Maybe we
will be able to cross-build from aarch64 to arhmf; I'm not sure. Efraim?

Ricardo has been working on getting some new x86_64 / i686 builders
online:

https://gnunet.org/bot/log/guix/2017-06-30#T1433202

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature