Wouldn’t using something like containers (docker etc) be the best fix here. Would ensure no unexpected interactions between the builds and yet have near zero overheads.
Just a thought. Alister Winfield. > On 14 Aug 2019, at 11:41, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz > <glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote: > > Hi Ryan! > > On 8/11/19 7:58 PM, Ryan Tandy wrote: >> It looks like the powerpc and ppc64 builds were running in parallel, on >> kapitsa and kapitsa2 respectively. If these builds were running in different >> chroots on the same host, then the test failure can be explained by >> ldapsearch returning data from a slapd instance started by the other build. >> >> Am I correct about the two chroots on the single host, and is this a common >> setup for Debian buildds? > > Yes, this machine is running two buildd instances on the same machine. The > machine rather fast so running > just one buildd instance would be a waste of resources. We are doing the same > for sparc64 as well. For > example, landau has so many CPUs and RAM that it can easily host 4 buildd > instances in parallel while > still being fast. The machine has 128 vCPUs and 96 GB of RAM. > >> I had assumed builds were typically run in isolated VMs. > > Yes, this certainly applies for the release architectures but not necessarily > for Debian Ports architectures > where the buildd instances are not maintained by the DSA team. > > Isolated VMs have the disadvantage that CPU and memory are not dynamically > shifted across build jobs which > can make build jobs less efficient when you have one VM building a small > package while the other one is > building something like Rust or gcc. > >> The test suite supports customizing the port numbers (by an environment >> variable), so I could randomize that in debian/rules. However the test suite >> doesn't have a way to check whether the chosen port is already in use, or >> whether slapd actually started successfully, so the risk of collision can't >> be completely eliminated. > > Understood. We might change the setup in the future. We just recently > received a new POWER server by > IBM for the powerpc and ppc64 ports but I haven't had the time yet to set it > up as I'm busy with > SUSE dayjob work. > >> For now, could you please give back openldap/2.4.48+dfsg-1 on powerpc? > > Done and it built fine. > > Adrian > > -- > .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz > : :' : Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org > `. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de > `- GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913 > > _______________________________________________ > Pkg-openldap-devel mailing list > pkg-openldap-de...@alioth-lists.debian.net > https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-openldap-devel
