Date: Sun, 29 May 2016 13:24:17 +0200 From: Kurt Jaeger <lists@opsec.eu> To: Fernando Herrero =?iso-8859-1?Q?Carr=F3n?= <elferdo@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: math/openblas + poudriere + manual building Message-ID: <20160529112416.GU41922@home.opsec.eu> In-Reply-To: <CAMwkeZw_ZvJfEOce3U-sq2JMtHwzMaYzmAX%2BL%2BKtfTtAdHoubg@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAMwkeZw_ZvJfEOce3U-sq2JMtHwzMaYzmAX%2BL%2BKtfTtAdHoubg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi! > I am using poudriere for the first time to test some patches to math/R. One > new feature will be the ability to link against math/openblas. My portstree > was updated yesterday (28/05). > For my purposes right now I only want to build math/openblas (0.2.18,1) for > my computer, so I uncheck the DYNAMIC_ARCH option, which I suppose will > generate code for many architectures. Use DYNAMIC_ARCH, otherwise the port is configured to not build in poudriere. As far as I understand, those BLAS related codes all try either to build for multiple CPUs or try to build for a specific CPU. So what should the poor port maintainer do ? Either she allows to build anyway, which produces a optimized port for the CPU of the builder host, or she says: We can't, build it manually. It's a mess. From my point of view, it should always build with DYNAMIC_ARCH, which is not always the fastest binary, but at least it builds 8-} > * After searching a bit, I have not found how to *manually* build a package > in poudriere. Does that mean: build the port in your ports tree outside > poudriere? Yes. > Should that message be reworded? Is there something missing in > the documentation? Am I missing something? It's a difficult topic, so it's difficult to reword. Do you have suggestions ? > * I see some people are manually editing the Makefile of math/atlas to tune > to their machines [2]. My solution with math/openblas has been to finally > enable DYNAMIC_ARCH, which probably compiles more code than I need to. I am > fairly comfortable with the package optimizing for the build machine. Isn't > there any easy way to force poudriere to go on? You are asking for an easy way to override MANUAL_PACKAGE_BUILD. > Setting NO_IGNORE in the > environment or something like that (which, surprisingly, allows building of > forbidden, but not ignored ports)? It would be useful, yes. Probably submit a PR for poudriere to add some flag like this. -- pi@opsec.eu +49 171 3101372 4 years to go !
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20160529112416.GU41922>