On Fri, 15 Oct 2010, b. f. wrote: > On 10/15/10, Ian Smith <smi...@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 _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
