/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2005/06/24/#ubuntu-toolchain.txt

=== lamont__ [~lamont@15.238.5.130] has joined #ubuntu-toolchain
=== Seveaz [~seveas@seveas.demon.nl] has joined #ubuntu-toolchain
=== BenM is now known as bhome
=== bzzz is now known as BenM
fabbionemorning06:13
fabbioneinfinity: ping?06:33
fabbionelamont: ping?06:34
lamontfabbione: ack07:06
fabbionelamont: yo..07:06
lamontgcc-4.0 -8ubuntu3 is at 9.5 hours.  sigh07:06
fabbionelamont: i was asking infinity as well.. do you remember the commands that a buildd needs to have in sudo privileges without passwd?07:06
fabbioneright now we figured apt-get and dpkg07:07
lamontI know it passes lots of cruft in - generally the machines I've seen just gave buildd all commands, prolly out of lazyiness07:07
lamontit's going to need chroot as well, I expect07:07
fabbioneand if any of you 2 remembers how to get stats out of a single buildd?07:08
fabbionelamont: hm right..07:08
fabbionelike i have N buildds.. but i want to know exactly how much work one buildd is doing07:08
lamontmore ~buildd/stats/Summary07:09
fabbionethere is no Summary :)07:09
lamontdunno why I have one then07:10
fabbionesome of your scripts generate it?07:10
=== lamont shrugs. all of the (neuro-based) buildd's I'm running have stats...
fabbionethis is the one from db.d.o07:11
lamontyep07:11
fabbionesparcbuildd@test7:~/stats$ ls07:11
fabbionebuild-time  builds  taken07:11
=== fabbione scratches his head
fabbioneis it a config option?07:12
lamontbuildd-watcher creates summary07:12
fabbionehmm i don't think i am running it.. should i?07:12
lamontit'll give you a summary :-)07:12
lamontand keep buildd running..07:13
lamont20,50 * * * *    nice -10 /usr/bin/buildd-watcher07:13
lamontis what debian has07:13
fabbionebuildd keeps running anyway :)07:13
=== lamont needs to sleep
fabbionelamont: last question :)07:14
fabbionethe option to fork buildd if more than N packages needs-build07:14
fabbionedid you ever use it?07:14
fabbionedoes it actually work?07:14
fabbione(i know infinity i did ask you already ;))07:14
lamonthaven't used it07:14
fabbioneok07:14
lamontbut I expect that works07:14
lamontsince some of the slower debian architectures have been using it at least in the past07:15
fabbionei wonder who i could ask for sure...07:16
lamontany more 'one last question's?07:16
fabbionenope :)07:16
lamontok.  gonna sleep, I think.07:16
infinityAre you talking about the secondary threshold?07:16
fabbioneinfinity: yes07:16
lamontbah - /me looks at the buildd source for a minute07:16
fabbionelamont: don't worry.. 07:17
fabbionehave a good night :)07:17
infinityRevisiting that recently, I'm not sure it's an option to fork at all.07:17
fabbioneplease it's really nothing urgent07:17
fabbioneBuild daemon statistics from 19700101-0100 to 20050617-0715 (12951.22 days):07:17
fabbionehaah07:17
infinityBut rather to declare the this particular buildd is a "secondary", and should only --take and build packages if needs-build is > foo07:17
fabbionethe first run is sick :)07:17
lamont                logger( "$dist: total $total packages to build.\n" ) if $total;07:17
lamont                if ($total && $conf::secondary_daemon_threshold &&07:17
lamont                        $total < $conf::secondary_daemon_threshold) {07:17
lamont                        logger( "Not enough packages to build -- ".07:17
lamont                                        "secondary daemon not starting\n" );07:17
lamont                        next;07:17
lamont                }07:17
lamontlooks right to me07:17
lamontinfinity: exactly07:17
infinitySee? :)07:18
infinityNo forking.07:18
lamontso the buildd just idles along doing nothing until such time as the rest have fallen behind.  then it kicks in and actually does something for a bit07:18
=== lamont sleeps
fabbionegood night lamont07:18
lamontinfinity: forking wouldn't help, since it's on the same machine... /me just figured that fabbione was using words in a slightly european manner. :)07:19
fabbioneehhe07:19
=== lamont cries. I'll deal with caballero tomorrow when I'm awake
lamontstarting with a fresh kernel build for it.07:22
lamontesp if fabbione has finished and uploaded -1.207:22
fabbionelamont: i am almost done :)07:22
fabbionei miss usb-modules, pcmcia* and nic*07:23
fabbionethe latter is a real pain :(07:23
infinitylamont : No, forking obviously wouldn't work, hence the confusion. :)07:25
infinity(Well, forking could work if you made dead sure that you were always building for two different dists in parallel, and never two packages on the same dist)07:25
infinityCould be handy to get RIGHT NOW, DAMNIT security builds without runinng a second buildd.07:26
fabbioneinfinity: it can't be that hard to implement07:30
fabbionebut i am hounestly far away motivated to do so07:30
fabbioneor given a good design07:31
fabbioneget sbuild to understand the concept of target chroot07:31
fabbioneand get buildd to for N instances of sbuild07:32
fabbioneat that point the concept of suite can be easily implemented in buildd to run sbuild N times07:32
=== fabbione thinks....
fabbionecan't be that hard07:33
infinityI think all you really need here is target locking.07:33
fabbionewith target locking you can run only one instance of sbuild for breezy for ex07:34
fabbioneand one for hoary-security07:34
infinityAlso handy if a machine goes down in the middle of a build.  No more @reboot touch ~buildd/NO-DAEMON-PLEASE, but instead you get a buildd that comes up building for all the non-locked chroots, and you get the clean the locked on.07:34
fabbionethat's because sbuildd is hardcoded for the target chroot07:34
infinityWhy would I want more than one for breezy?...07:34
infinityOh, I guess if you want to take advantage of multiple CPUs and fast disk.07:35
fabbioneexactly07:35
infinityBut that's a use case I don't care about as much as timely security updates.07:35
danielsand timely xorg updates07:35
fabbioneso the first step would be to let sbuild understand in what chroot it should build07:35
fabbioneno option = use the default07:35
fabbioneotherwise switch to the specified chroot07:36
infinityJust have it pick a random unlocked chroot at build-target/chroot-target[0-9] 07:36
fabbionebuildd at that point can really for N instances of sbuild07:36
infinityOr whatever.07:36
infinity(And don't spawn new instances if all available chroots are locked)07:36
fabbioneand buildd will need to understand the concept of forking and forking per release/security or whatever07:37
fabbioneexactly07:37
infinityNo config file changes to add new chroots that way.  And when you fix a locked chroot, it magically comes back online.07:37
fabbioneit doesn't sound impossible.. just boring to death to do it :)07:37
infinityIt sounds like something I'd happily do... If I was allowed to.07:37
infinity<cough>07:37
=== BenM is now known as bsleep
=== doko [~doko___@dsl-084-059-075-240.arcor-ip.net] has joined #ubuntu-toolchain
fabbioneelmo: did you already setup logs@u.c ?09:58
elmofabbione: no09:59
fabbioneelmo: ok thanks :)10:00
\shmake[4] : *** [Sequence.o]  Segmentation fault11:48
\shppc..if anybody is interessted to check: http://people.ubuntu.com/~lamont/buildLogs/o/openscenegraph/0.9.8-4ubuntu2/openscenegraph_0.9.8-4ubuntu2_20050617-0944-powerpc-failed.gz11:49
fabbione\sh: ppc is known to send spurios segfaults11:49
fabbioneit's probably enough to kick the package back11:49
fabbionethat problem will go away as soon as we can install ppc64 kernels on the buildd11:49
\shso...version+1 and do it again11:50
fabbioneno11:50
fabbioneyou wait for lamont/infinity/elmo to kick it back11:50
\shoh ok11:50
fabbioneuploading to trigger a rebuild is BAD11:50
fabbioneand pointless11:50
infinityAnd BAD.12:29
infinityAlso, it's not good.12:29
=== jbailey crawls towards being alert.
=== cartman [foobar@cartman.developer.konversation] has joined #ubuntu-toolchain
=== cartman [foobar@cartman.developer.konversation] has left #ubuntu-toolchain ["Ich]
=== zul [~chuck@CPE0006258ec6c2-CM000a73655d0e.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #ubuntu-toolchain
lamontfabbione: ppc is known to send spurious SIGILL, not SEGV03:12
jbaileyHPPA on the other hand...03:15
=== jbailey hides.
fabbionelamont: well whatever :)03:18
fabbionelamont: ppc64 kernels fix that 03:18
fabbionelamont: i did try to be extremely careful changing the d-i stuff on hppa03:18
fabbionelamont: but i can't be 100% sure it's ok03:18
fabbioneof all the changes i missed one on ppc.. (the HACK ALERT )03:18
lamontso I should do another test build, eh?03:19
fabbioneif it fails on hppa please send me the last 30 lines of the log03:19
fabbionelamont: i already uploaded03:19
fabbionemdz wants .12 in main asap03:19
lamontbuildd   18155  0.0  0.2  37800 17068 ?        SN   02:15   0:00 /build/buildd/gcc-4.0-4.0.0/build/hppa-linux/libjava/testsuite/SyncTest.exe03:20
lamontbuildd   18156  0.0  0.2  37800 17068 ?        SN   02:15   0:00 /build/buildd/gcc-4.0-4.0.0/build/hppa-linux/libjava/testsuite/SyncTest.exe03:20
lamontbuildd   18157 20.4  0.2  37800 17068 ?        RN   02:15  62:11 /build/buildd/gcc-4.0-4.0.0/build/hppa-linux/libjava/testsuite/SyncTest.exe03:20
lamontbuildd   18158 20.4  0.2  37800 17068 ?        RN   02:15  62:16 /build/buildd/gcc-4.0-4.0.0/build/hppa-linux/libjava/testsuite/SyncTest.exe03:20
lamontbuildd   18159 20.4  0.2  37800 17068 ?        RN   02:15  62:19 /build/buildd/gcc-4.0-4.0.0/build/hppa-linux/libjava/testsuite/SyncTest.exe03:20
lamontbuildd   18160 20.4  0.2  37800 17068 ?        RN   02:15  62:06 /build/buildd/gcc-4.0-4.0.0/build/hppa-linux/libjava/testsuite/SyncTest.exe03:20
lamontbuildd   18161  0.0  0.0   2224   564 ?        SN   02:15   0:00  \_ c++filt -s java03:20
=== lamont throws SyncTest.exe at doko
=== doko ducks
lamontotoh, your ada-test-b0rkage-killer seems to work fine03:23
=== lamont --> work
dokohmm, but somebody reported something with the acats-killer ...03:29
=== doko [~doko___@dsl-084-059-081-250.arcor-ip.net] has joined #ubuntu-toolchain
=== lamont [~lamont@15.238.5.145] has joined #ubuntu-toolchain
=== bhome is now known as BenM
lamontwow.  after killing all those doko-be-damned SyncTest.exe's, gcc-4.0 may actually finish building (it's installing now)04:41
lamontSubject: Log for successful build of gcc-4.0_4.0.0-8ubuntu3 (dist=breezy)04:54
lamontBuild needed 19:17:02, 2076384k disk space04:55
lamontadmittedly, something around 5 hours of that was waiting for some nice admin to killall -9 SyncTest.exe04:55
lamontI'm not sure if it's worse that I have a 24-port managed switch under my desk, or that there are 8 ports currently lit in it.04:59
lamontwow. binutils wants 7 min on i386, 21 on ia64, and 94 on hppa.  WTH?06:23
lamonthrm. probably binutils-hppa6406:23
\shlamont: libtool: link: `../lib/libh5tools.la' is not a valid libtool archive <- hdf5 only on ppc all other archs ok 06:26
dokolamont: tausq did just email me:06:27
dokofyi gcc-4.0 is significantly broken for hppa until #2205106:27
doko(gcc bugzilla) is fixed....06:27
lamontas in I should turn off the autobuilder until it is?06:27
dokoyour decision, you're the port maintainer :)06:31
dokoforwarding the mail ...06:31
=== elmo_ [~james@83-216-141-215.jamest298.adsl.metronet.co.uk] has joined #ubuntu-toolchain
lamontdoko: we already switched to 4.0 for breezy, though.....  Time to go find out what "significantly broken" means06:38
dokolamont: we did? ;) yes, sure, we have to.06:42
lamontjbailey: you around?09:33
jbaileylamont: Yup09:36
lamontwhy did we disable glibc test suite for hppa (besides "because lamont said to")09:36
lamont(see #parisc)09:36
lamontdoko: still awake by chance?10:27
dokoit's 10:30pm10:27
jbaileylamont: We're Canonical employees, we're not permitted sleep.10:27
lamontis our gcc-4.0 built using gcc-4.0?10:28
dokono10:28
doko3.310:28
=== lamont hugs doko
dokoyou're talking on #paris?10:29
lamontyes10:29
lamontuh....10:29
lamontgcc-4.0 does not Build-Depend: gcc-3.310:30
dokognat-3.310:30
lamontno, I meant gCC-4.010:30
=== lamont is trying to work around the gcc-bug
lamont22051, that is10:31
dokogcc-4.0 b-d on gnat-3.3. gnat-3.3 depends on gcc-3.310:31
lamontah, ok10:31
lamontand how does the build invoke gcc to build things?  the only place that the string 'gcc-3.3' appears in the log file is in a Conflicts...10:31
dokognatgcc10:32
lamonthow, um, bizare10:32
lamontso we know that no gcc-4.0 compiler is used in the building of gcc-4.0, right?10:32
lamonter, that is: so we know that no -4.0 compiler is used in the building of gcc-4.0, right?10:33
dokocorrect. unless you disable ada10:35
lamontwhich hppa doesn't?10:35
dokowhich server was #parisc on10:35
dokono10:35
dokobut I should make it more robust and use gcc-3.3 explicitely.10:36
=== lamont nods
dokoor 3.4 ...10:37
dokoso, what did you find out?10:37
jbaileydoko: #parisc is on oftc10:44
jbailey(god, I almost said efnet for a sec...)10:44

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!