View mode: basic / threaded / horizontal-split · Log in · Help
October 17, 2012
Re: Account on ARM/Debian
On 10/17/2012 05:45 PM, David Nadlinger wrote:
> I recently got an ODROID-X (4x1.4 GHz Cortex A9, 1GB RAM) for a very similar
> purpose, i.e. running the LDC test suite on ARM. It's fast enough that working
> on compiler development without resorting to cross-compiling is actually
> somewhat fun, but I didn't get around to set it up it yet – we are cleaning
> things up for an actual x86/x86_64 release right now, as some distros seem to
> decisively prefer packaging releases instead of Git revisions.

Just to note, even if you're building from source it's handy to have a "stable 
release" branch alongside the latest dev.
October 17, 2012
Re: Account on ARM/Debian
On Wednesday, 17 October 2012 at 16:24:44 UTC, Joseph Rushton 
Wakeling wrote:
> Just to note, even if you're building from source it's handy to 
> have a "stable release" branch alongside the latest dev.

Well, that depends on your definition of stable. LDC Git master 
is supposed always pass the CI tests, i.e. the DMD, druntime and 
Phobos test suites.

A possible extension of that would be to have a separate 
»stable« Git branch which is automatically advanced along with 
master by the CI system whenever a given revision passes all the 
tests. If somebody wants to set up a system like this, I'd be 
happy to officially adopt it.

But in my experience, anything more than that, i.e. declaring 
revisions stable based on criteria which can't be evaluated by an 
automatic test suite, is not worth it, at least for smallish 
projects like LDC. Judging whether a given state is stable by 
hand is notoriously hard to get right, and the reason we have 
beta phases before releases, etc.

David
October 17, 2012
Re: Account on ARM/Debian
On Wednesday, 17 October 2012 at 16:24:44 UTC, Joseph Rushton 
Wakeling wrote:
> Just to note, even if you're building from source it's handy to 
> have a "stable release" branch alongside the latest dev.

Well, that depends on your definition of stable. LDC Git master 
is supposed always pass the CI tests, i.e. the DMD, druntime and 
Phobos test suites.

A possible extension of that would be to have a separate 
»stable« Git branch which is automatically advanced along with 
master by the CI system whenever a given revision passes all the 
tests. If somebody wants to set up a system like this, I'd be 
happy to officially adopt it.

But in my experience, anything more than that, i.e. declaring 
revisions stable based on criteria which can't be evaluated by an 
automatic test suite, is not worth it, at least for smallish 
projects like LDC. Judging whether a given state is stable by 
hand is notoriously hard to get right, and the reason we have 
beta phases before releases, etc.

David
October 18, 2012
Re: Account on ARM/Debian
On 16/10/2012 12:11, Alix Pexton wrote:
> On 16/10/2012 11:48, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>> Do you need a static IP set on the firewall to allow connections in?
>>
>
> I don't think so, will have to throw that one over to my brother to be
> sure ^^


Make that a maybe!

After being on-line for less than 24 hours, the poor RasPi was being 
penetration tested from IPs as far apart as Korea and Sussex!

I'm still willing to let my RasPi be used for this fine cause, but my 
Brother wants to investigate why his IP has gotten interest from foreign 
powers, and reconfigure the firewall before it gets reconnected.

Aside from Ian, are there any other GDC/ARM developers (who might want 
access)? I'm considering making individual accounts for each user rather 
than just giving out the password to the "pi" user.

A...
October 18, 2012
Re: Account on ARM/Debian
On 10/18/2012 03:18 PM, Alix Pexton wrote:
> I'm considering making individual accounts for each user rather than just giving
> out the password to the "pi" user.

TBH that "pi" account seems like a massive security vulnerability for any RasPi 
that is open to remote login.  Yes, you can change the password, but I'd be 
inclined to remove it and set up an administrator account with a completely 
different name ...
October 18, 2012
Re: Account on ARM/Debian
On 18 October 2012 14:18, Alix Pexton <alix.DOT.pexton@gmail.dot.com> wrote:
> On 16/10/2012 12:11, Alix Pexton wrote:
>>
>> On 16/10/2012 11:48, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>>>
>>> Do you need a static IP set on the firewall to allow connections in?
>>>
>>
>> I don't think so, will have to throw that one over to my brother to be
>> sure ^^
>
>
>
> Make that a maybe!
>
> After being on-line for less than 24 hours, the poor RasPi was being
> penetration tested from IPs as far apart as Korea and Sussex!
>

I'm in Sussex, it was probably me. :-p


-- 
Iain Buclaw

*(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';
October 18, 2012
Re: Account on ARM/Debian
On 10/17/2012 06:37 PM, David Nadlinger wrote:
> Well, that depends on your definition of stable. LDC Git master is supposed
> always pass the CI tests, i.e. the DMD, druntime and Phobos test suites.

Which would explain my (limited, as I haven't been doing any development 
recently) experience of it seeming very stable and effective when built (and 
rebuilt) from git sources. :-)

Have any optimization improvements landed recently?  It really seems like since 
my last email on the subject, the speed of executables has improved to be about 
the same as GDC.

> A possible extension of that would be to have a separate »stable« Git branch
> which is automatically advanced along with master by the CI system whenever a
> given revision passes all the tests. If somebody wants to set up a system like
> this, I'd be happy to officially adopt it.

That's not what I was really thinking about -- I trust you and the other LDC 
devs to make sure things pass all the automated tests before merging into master.

> But in my experience, anything more than that, i.e. declaring revisions stable
> based on criteria which can't be evaluated by an automatic test suite, is not
> worth it, at least for smallish projects like LDC. Judging whether a given state
> is stable by hand is notoriously hard to get right, and the reason we have beta
> phases before releases, etc.

What I had in mind was that you might define a "stable" branch which is updated 
according to certain new-feature milestones, and which in the interim between 
those milestones only receives bugfixes, not new features.

I guess the benefits of doing this depend on the extent to which you have a 
well-defined roadmap which would let you define a "milestone", though it might 
be possible to do it on the basis of the frontend/druntime/phobos version.

It probably seems not-worth-doing unless you are making official releases 
anyway, but from my point of view as a "consumer" of LDC it feels like a nice 
option to be able to have a branch that is updated more slowly -- i.e. with 
material that isn't just the latest patches, but that has been around for a 
while so that the devs have had time to spot any holes.
October 18, 2012
Re: Account on ARM/Debian
On 18/10/2012 14:32, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
> On 10/18/2012 03:18 PM, Alix Pexton wrote:
>> I'm considering making individual accounts for each user rather than
>> just giving
>> out the password to the "pi" user.
>
> TBH that "pi" account seems like a massive security vulnerability for
> any RasPi that is open to remote login.  Yes, you can change the
> password, but I'd be inclined to remove it and set up an administrator
> account with a completely different name ...

Any advice/instruction (the clearer the better) on how to setup my RasPi 
so that it is more secure are very welcome ^^

I'm also looking for a smallish USB hard drive to attach as a swap-drive 
so that there is scope to compile GDC, everything I have seen so far 
costs more than the RasPi did and does not fit my definition of "smallish".

A...
October 18, 2012
Re: Account on ARM/Debian
On Thursday, 18 October 2012 at 13:33:02 UTC, Joseph Rushton 
Wakeling wrote:
> On 10/18/2012 03:18 PM, Alix Pexton wrote:
>> I'm considering making individual accounts for each user 
>> rather than just giving
>> out the password to the "pi" user.
>
> TBH that "pi" account seems like a massive security 
> vulnerability for any RasPi that is open to remote login.  Yes, 
> you can change the password, but I'd be inclined to remove it 
> and set up an administrator account with a completely different 
> name ...

You could also add an AllowUsers setting to /etc/ssh/sshd_config 
and not include the pi user in it.
Next ›   Last »
1 2 3
Top | Discussion index | About this forum | D home