From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 17 14:39:50 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34C461065678 for ; Wed, 17 Jun 2009 14:39:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-ports-local@be-well.ilk.org) Received: from mail5.sea5.speakeasy.net (mail5.sea5.speakeasy.net [69.17.117.7]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B8DC8FC2B for ; Wed, 17 Jun 2009 14:39:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-ports-local@be-well.ilk.org) Received: (qmail 24621 invoked from network); 17 Jun 2009 14:39:49 -0000 Received: from dsl092-078-145.bos1.dsl.speakeasy.net (HELO be-well.ilk.org) ([66.92.78.145]) (envelope-sender ) by mail5.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 17 Jun 2009 14:39:48 -0000 Received: by be-well.ilk.org (Postfix, from userid 1147) id 850175084F; Wed, 17 Jun 2009 10:39:47 -0400 (EDT) To: Robert Huff References: <4A38B47E.1070906@icyb.net.ua> <20090617133231.3883776a@sub.han.vpn.gamesnet.de> <19000.55863.785195.669767@jerusalem.litteratus.org> <44tz2f9gpb.fsf@lowell-desk.lan> <19000.64032.525753.249900@jerusalem.litteratus.org> From: Lowell Gilbert Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 10:39:47 -0400 In-Reply-To: <19000.64032.525753.249900@jerusalem.litteratus.org> (Robert Huff's message of "Wed\, 17 Jun 2009 10\:13\:52 -0400") Message-ID: <447hzazzyk.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.3 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: FreeBSD Ports Subject: Re: portupgrade/ruby issue? (Stale lock file was found. Removed.) X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 14:39:50 -0000 Robert Huff writes: > Lowell Gilbert writes: >> >> > After recent massive ports update (I think ruby was touch and >> >> > probably portupgrade too) I started getting seemingly sporadic "Stale >> >> > lock file was found. Removed." messages. What's interesting is that >> >> > those messages are produced on stdout, not stderr. >> >> >> >> Got the same on five 7-Stable Machines. >> > >> > And on -Current from April. So, not a function of the OS version. >> > Mine happens every time I run portupgrade/portversion, even >> > when prior runs completed successfully. >> > It seems harmless, but it would be Really Nice if it were >> > fixed. >> >> Not *completely* harmless; running separate portupgrade processes >> in parallel is pretty risky at the moment... > > When was it officually cleared to do that? Last I knew it was > "do at your own risk". I don't think it was ever officially supported, but it was the purpose behind adding the lock files in the first place. I've never used it heavily, although I did put it through a fairly heavy wringer when it was under development. For "real" use, I've found it convenient when building an upgrade to a particularly large port (generally OpenOffice) while upgrading a large number of other ports as well. I don't worry about it being foolproof, because my build server has nothing fundamentally valuable on it. But at the moment, the locking seems to be completely broken, which raises it to a whole other level of risk that I can't be bothered to mess with. [Not that I generally care how long port builds take; that's computer time, not human time.] - Lowell