Re: gdb and ancient GNU autotools

On Sun, 25 Feb 2024 at 21:19, Eli Schwartz <[email protected]> wrote:
[..]

> I think it's not entirely unreasonable for a project to internally place
> its own demands on its own resources, with the knowledge of how much it
> has in the way of resources...
>

For some reason LITERALLY only ONE git repo is treating that as DEMAND.
No, I'm pointing to an INCORRECT/UNREALISTIC/causing some real issues on
client side web server settings.

> But yes, having a cache certainly helps.
>
> Rather, it is "having a cache is basic politeness unto others"


So you suggest that I should start caching ..

[tkloczko@pers-jacek SPECS]$ grep VCS:.*https://sourceware.org/git *spec |
wc -l
8

of 4444 git repos because some wannabe-webmaster added a throttling module
in the web server setup when NO ONE ELSE ANYWHERE is using such settings?
Really?🤔
If "yes" I have no more questions.

[..]

> Refusing to use a cache is called executing a DDoS campaign.
>

In DDoS acronym first D stands for DISTRIBUTED.
I'm using a SINGLE source IP.
Reaching the throttling level is not equal to DENIAL of service. So that is
the second D.
3rd .. do you really want to name ~0.5 req/s as realistic/justificable
setup?
How many people here are using web server reqs throttling and how many
amongst them are using so LOW values?
NONE?🤔
.. THREE misunderstandings/mistakes in ONE sentence.

Thank you for suggestions of using some public buildbots on which I have no
physical control.
Even if I'll be using those buildbots (which I'm not going to waste my time
because I have now WORKING build infra) execution of the same build
procedure will cause the SAME RESULT. Do you see that now?🤔

Nevertheless I have enough HW resources.
This off-topic part has NOTHING to do with using throttling settings in ONE
cgit web frontend is YET another mistake/misunderstanding.
As the old saying goes .. "the road to hell is paved with good advice".

One more time: please focus on gdb and issues related to its build
automation.

kloczek