Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 4 Oct 2016 09:22:28 -0500
From:      John Marino <freebsd.contact@marino.st>
To:        Mathieu Arnold <mat@FreeBSD.org>, marino@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r422981 - in head/dns: bind9-devel bind910 bind911 bind99
Message-ID:  <f1653adc-8420-679b-328b-94c61f0d05cc@marino.st>
In-Reply-To: <c56a9708-4d00-82ab-cfe8-522e9981a57f@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <201609301244.u8UCiSSh043206@repo.freebsd.org> <d670864a-d31d-91a3-33ec-e3a58d30605d@marino.st> <be8e7cfd-3ee3-1629-d54a-6e0d00dd1ca8@FreeBSD.org> <383dbd77-15a0-ea2b-e909-e24d849e80f7@marino.st> <bfc32583-b0bb-0575-316e-8cccbb5c41e7@FreeBSD.org> <6a63b844-f762-c885-0dfd-21ff327abce8@marino.st> <c56a9708-4d00-82ab-cfe8-522e9981a57f@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 10/4/2016 09:18, Mathieu Arnold wrote:
> Le 04/10/2016 à 16:16, John Marino a écrit :
>> On 10/4/2016 09:13, Mathieu Arnold wrote:
>>> Le 04/10/2016 à 16:04, John Marino a écrit :
>>>> We build under a very heavy load which flushes out marginally unsafe
>>>> ports.
>>>
>>> Ok, so make(1) from dragonfly has the same bug make(1) from FreeBSD 9
>>> has, feel free to fix it in dragonfly's port tree.
>>
>> master has bmake 20160818 on it (for last 5 weeks)
>> Release 4.6 has bmake 20141111.
>> Do you know if make bug only applies to master?
>
> I have no idea.  I was told the problem was with make(1) on FreeBSD 9,
> which seemed to be right, as it does not fail at all on FreeBSD 10/11
> with -j 2-10.

The -j number is not the only factor here.  I've seen ports pass under 
very high -j numbers but start failing when the server gets loaded.

DragonFly has the lastest bmake, modern binutils, modern gcc and it 
doesn't have fmake (what freebsd 9 uses).

Why is it so critical to classify bind910 as jobs safe when there 
clearly is a question about it?  Let's not immediately assume DF is at 
fault here.  As I mentioned before, it could easily be the build tests 
you're doing aren't sufficient to flush this out.  It *was* marked 
UNSAFE before, obviously with good reason.  (albeit undocumented)

John




---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?f1653adc-8420-679b-328b-94c61f0d05cc>