Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 00:36:01 +1100 (EST) From: Ian Smith <smithi@nimnet.asn.au> To: bf1783@gmail.com Cc: Yuri <yuri@rawbw.com>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Too many binary packages are missing Message-ID: <20101017223443.F2036@sola.nimnet.asn.au> In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=3RFz=DUdxHB6fNV6dj2nhY=yS_9JOwaLGVC7N@mail.gmail.com> References: <20101014120034.B794D10656D8@hub.freebsd.org> <20101015012001.F2036@sola.nimnet.asn.au> <AANLkTi=3RFz=DUdxHB6fNV6dj2nhY=yS_9JOwaLGVC7N@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 15 Oct 2010, b. f. wrote: > On 10/15/10, Ian Smith <smithi@nimnet.asn.au> wrote: > ... > > > > > http://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8-stable works, > > it's what portupgrade looks at on an 8.1-STABLE system, but it's a bit > > sad finding the last directory updated at 1st October. I checked just > > one subdir, sysutils, and the newest file there is 30th September. > > http://pointyhat.freebsd.org/errorlogs/packagestats.html > http://portsmon.FreeBSD.org/portsuploadstatus.py Ah, ta .. hours of fun to be had in there, bookmarked this time. It sure helps toward appreciating the magnitude and scope of the task. > > Er, 8-STABLE (packages) is for currently 8.1-STABLE (world/kernel), no? > > No. I thought the 8-STABLE packages were from a recent snapshot of > 8-STABLE, because that's the way that tinderboxes are set up. > However, I checked, and actually a version of the last supported > stable branch of 6.*, and some versions of the _oldest_ supported > stable branches of 7,8 are used. Right now, for i386 it's: > > 6.x-stable --> 6.4-RELEASE-p9 > 7.x-stable --> 7.1-RELEASE-p12 > 8.x-stable --> 8.0-RELEASE-p2 > 9.x-current --> a snaphot of 9-CURRENT > > Other architectures may use slightly different versions. This is an > attempt to build packages that work on the all stable branches of all > supported releases, although obviously this may occasionally fail. Just to check that I get it .. for packages-8-stable, an 8.0-RELEASE-p2 kernel + world is used to _build_ these, is that right? So they should then install fine on any later 8.x system too? > > however looking at the (preserved by fetch) dates these packages were > > built, it's clear that building (eg here for 8-stable i386) is done in > > batches that run for several hours, but are only done several times per > > month, at best. > > On some architectures, the building seems to be done more often than > the uploading to the ftp server. (Perhaps some of these are > incomplete builds.) So in some cases you can actually get more recent > packages directly from pointyhat, but I think that they are only > intended for testing purposes, and not for mass distribution. Pav > told me that he uploads amd64 packages within 24 hours of the > completion of a build, although it takes further time for them to > propagate to the mirrors. Ok, I'll bear that in mind for needed packages that 'should' be there. I don't mind building lots of stuff from source but the idea of building xorg or kde on a 1.1 MHz processor is scary, given using it meanwhile :) > > The last time I noticed such big delays between updated ports and their > > packages (IIRC, 2007) Kris Kennaway put in a successful word to someone > > .. who should we be bugging these days? > > portmgr@ -- I think linimon@, pav@, and a few others are in charge of > the package-building machines. On some architectures (e.g., ia64, > powerpc and sparc64), I think that the paucity of available hardware > limits the frequency of the builds, but I'm not sure about i386. The > available logs show that the last builds for 8.x-stable i386 were on: > > 20100804 > 20100808 > 20100815 > 20100820 > 20100821 > 20100823 > 20100908 > 20100927 > 20101007 > > I don't know the rationale behind the schedule, although I heard that > some work was recently being done on parts of the cluster, and that > some exp-runs were made. I vaguely recall a discussion about prioritising 'more popular' package building at one stage, but it looks like just keeping up is fun enough. Thanks for the detail and pointers, cheers, Ian
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20101017223443.F2036>