Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 17:18:15 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 193077] [stage] graphics/repng2jpeg: Add stage support and take maintainership Message-ID: <bug-193077-13-wY75teOT8Q@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-193077-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-193077-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193077 --- Comment #3 from C Hutchinson <portmaster@bsdforge.com> --- (In reply to John Marino from comment #2) > All of your ports are staying in triage until I get poudriere logs. I > consider them mandatory now based on past experience. > > You've got several stuck in the queue, so I would switch your efforts to > poudriere instead of staging more ports that are going to get stuck. OK. Here's the deal... YES. I _did_ say I'd add poudriere, as a part of the new "devbox". BUT. I've been tracking RELENG (stable) for ~20yrs. I currently own/manage ~30 servers (locally). As I own ~60 domains, which requires management of ~140 hosts, and the requisite services. They ALL track RELENG (8, and 9). As a result; CURRENT/HEAD (where BASE is concerned) is fairly new territory. I grossly underestimated what a pig [the FreeBSD] clang was/is. Example; I go from 0 to running a new world && kernel in less than 25 minutes on GCC -- FAVORITE_COMPILER=GCC WITHOUT_CLANG=true However, on CURRENT && empty make.conf(5) || src.conf(5) I went from 0 to running a new world && kernel in greater than 4 _hours_! Required 4x the storage, as well. Please pardon my language; but WTF?! Do people use clang on purpose? Hard to understand why. Do note; on OSX && clang on "classic" Mac hardware (dual proc @500Mhz) I do _not_ experience this/ these issues. IMHO the FreeBSD version [of clang] is not ready for prime time. To the point; As a result, my gross oversight resulted in my having a grossly under-resourced "devbox". I spent more time on it, than I had scheduled for it (remember, I manage a bunch of servers to "pay the bills"). So, for now. I'm going to attempt to make it work. To do this whole thing _correctly_ I'm going to need; 8 CPU's (or an 8 core CPU) 3Tb SSD (total capacity) 16Gb RAM (minimum) MB that supports above requirements While the above requirements should likely be considered excessive for a simple port testing rig. The only way I am able to justify using poudriere (given it's requirements) is for testing/building Test Cases for the servers I already run -- testing/creating releases, and creating dumps that I can simply restore(8) to the server, once satisfied. To make a long story short; the resources I currently employed for this endeavour. Won't cut it. I only have 8Gb available on /var. I can imagine still being able to do it. But in order to do it, I will need to figure out how to 1) dump(8) the running 11-CURRENT 2) restore(8) to populate the poudriere jail At which time, I can work out of the ports tree living there. But that's all I can figure, until I acquire the hardware list above. So there you have it. Sorry. I know it's a bit "wordy". If you know of, or can think of anything more clever. Do let me know, please. :) As always, thanks, John. --Chris -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-193077-13-wY75teOT8Q>