[cfarm-users] Future of cfarm186/cfarm187/cfarm188 at OSUOSL

[Thorsten Glaser]

On Sat, 15 Nov 2025, Collin Funk via cfarm-users wrote:

>> I think Hurd would make a good choice to help with portability of
>> C/C++ programs for a couple of reasons.

I’d love to have a Hurd box to debug things like the segfaulting
of GNU CVS in the testsuite. There are Debian porterboxen, but for
ports architectures they’re harder to get at.

>I'm not sure how feasible it would be to run Hurd. I have crashed it a
>few times while testing Coreutils, for example [1].

Used to be that running the mksh testsuite under script(1) (so it
has a pseudo-terminal for the fake-interactive tests) crashed it
reliably, so I have to skip these tests in the package build… of
course, these days, script(1) in Debian is Linux-only despite the
mail from Karel that said he’ll see that the fallback way returns…

If there’s going to be a Hurd box, it better be several small VMs
and a way to detect crashes and restart them.

There’s hurd-amd64 as well these days, not only just hurd-i386,
and hurd-arm64 is on the horizon, too.

bye,
//mirabilos
-- 
11:56⎜«liwakura:#!/bin/mksh» also, i wanted to add mksh to my own distro │
i was disappointed that there is no makefile │ but somehow the Build.sh is
the least painful built system i've ever seen │ honours CC, {CPP,C,LD}FLAGS
properly │ looks cleary like done by someone who knows what they are doing