On Jan 27, 2025, at 6:06 PM, Theo Buehler <t...@theobuehler.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 11:00:03PM +0000, Kurt Miller wrote:
>> On Jan 27, 2025, at 4:50 PM, Kurt Mosiejczuk <k...@cranky.work> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 03:16:57PM +0000, Kurt Miller wrote:
>>>> On Jan 23, 2025, at 3:49 AM, Theo Buehler <t...@theobuehler.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> Thoughts? If looks good, testing with a bulk build on amd64 and sparc64
>>>>>> would be
>>>>>> helpful to ensure I didn't miss a port that needs a REVISION bump.
>>>
>>>>> This went through an amd64 bulk with no fallout. I think you should land
>>>>> this and if there's sparc64 fallout, we can deal with it in tree.
>>>
>>>> Ok. Thanks for the bulk build and review. I have committed it and will
>>>> review the sparc64 bulk build logs for any missing REVISION bumps needed.
>>>
>>> Lots of fallout. I have domething that keeps the logs from sending out
>>> before
>>> my review if we have less than 9000 packages. This run has only produced
>>> 6998
>>> packages. I'll let these logs through, but we're probably looking at
>>> multiple
>>> runs of whackamole doing it this way.
>>
>> Can you tar up the logs so I can search them and see what’s going on quicker?
>
> Look at
>
> https://cranky.work/sparc64/2025-01-26/summary.log
>
> Two obvious things with a huge chain of dependencies are
>
> nghttp3 -> curl -> ...
> glib2,bootstrap -> ...
>
> I bumped them. But if such crucial things are missed, this is indeed
> going to take a while.
niobe$ grep -l "Error: change in plist" *.log | wc -l
35
Ugh this is a class of ports I didn’t focus on… those that use
COMPILER = base-clang ports-gcc
for a c only port. While there are only 35 ports in this list, as you
point out they block other ports and this will become an iterative
process. Perhaps its better to bump arch-defines.mk SYSTEM_VERSION
for non-base clang arches?
-Kurt M
