Jenkins build is still unstable: FreeBSD_stable_10 #320

[jenkins-admin]

See 

___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Building "extra" kernels in stable/11...?

[David Wolfskill]

For the paast few years, up through stable/10, I've had a dedicated
"build machine" at home where I build the role-specific kernels for
a couple of "production" machines (they "only" at home, but my
spouse & I depend on them), and update the production machines by
(temporarily) mounting /usr/src and /usr/obj from the build machine
onto each production machine (via NFS), then performing (essentially)
make installkernel, make installworld, mergemaster (with the usual
additional steps).

This has worked quite well, and has been nearly trouble-free.  It's
described in rather more detail in
.)

Now, the build machine itself runs a GENERIC kernel (and has minimal
ports installed); I told it to build the additional kernels by appending
the line:

KERNCONF?=GENERIC ALBERT BATS

to /etc/src.conf -- and that has been working (as above).


Today, as part of my gradual ramp-up toward getting readyto test
stable/11 on more than just the above build machine and my laptop, I
figured I'd start building those extra kernels (along with GENERIC) when
the build machine updated its stable/11.

Accordingly, I appended

KERNCONF?=GENERIC ALBERT BATS

to /etc/src.conf -- but the only kernel even attempted was GENERIC.  In
reviewing the typescript (as I do all builds within script(1)), there
was no indication that the kernel-building process had any awareness
that anything other than GENERIC was wanted.

Have I managed to overlook something obvious (again)?

Thanks!

Peace,
david
-- 
David H. Wolfskill  da...@catwhisker.org
Those who would murder in the name of God or prophet are blasphemous cowards.

See http://www.catwhisker.org/~david/publickey.gpg for my public key.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Building "extra" kernels in stable/11...?

[Herbert J. Skuhra]

David Wolfskill skrev:
> 
> For the paast few years, up through stable/10, I've had a dedicated
> "build machine" at home where I build the role-specific kernels for
> a couple of "production" machines (they "only" at home, but my
> spouse & I depend on them), and update the production machines by
> (temporarily) mounting /usr/src and /usr/obj from the build machine
> onto each production machine (via NFS), then performing (essentially)
> make installkernel, make installworld, mergemaster (with the usual
> additional steps).
> 
> This has worked quite well, and has been nearly trouble-free.  It's
> described in rather more detail in
> .)
> 
> Now, the build machine itself runs a GENERIC kernel (and has minimal
> ports installed); I told it to build the additional kernels by appending
> the line:
> 
> KERNCONF?=GENERIC ALBERT BATS
> 
> to /etc/src.conf -- and that has been working (as above).
> 
> 
> Today, as part of my gradual ramp-up toward getting readyto test
> stable/11 on more than just the above build machine and my laptop, I
> figured I'd start building those extra kernels (along with GENERIC) when
> the build machine updated its stable/11.
> 
> Accordingly, I appended
> 
> KERNCONF?=GENERIC ALBERT BATS
> 
> to /etc/src.conf -- but the only kernel even attempted was GENERIC.  In
> reviewing the typescript (as I do all builds within script(1)), there
> was no indication that the kernel-building process had any awareness
> that anything other than GENERIC was wanted.
> 
> Have I managed to overlook something obvious (again)?

1. Are you sure that you don't have KERNCONF defined in
/etc/make.conf?

2. Have you tried to set 'KERNCONF=GENERIC ALBERT BATS' instead?

Well, I cannot reproduce this issue on my stable/11 machine.

--
Herbert
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: Building "extra" kernels in stable/11...?

[David Wolfskill]

On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 05:45:11PM +0200, Herbert J. Skuhra wrote:
> 
> Well, I cannot reproduce this issue on my stable/11 machine.
> 

For good reason.  It turns out that I was so *sure* I had my kernel
config files (for ALBERT & BATS) in place thta I didn't even check to
verify that.

And when I did:

freebeast(11.0)[1] ls -lT /usr/src/sys/amd64/conf/{GENERIC,ALBERT,BATS}
ls: /usr/src/sys/amd64/conf/ALBERT: No such file or directory
ls: /usr/src/sys/amd64/conf/BATS: No such file or directory
-rw-r--r--  1 david  wheel  14315 Jul  8 04:00:47 2016 
/usr/src/sys/amd64/conf/GENERIC
freebeast(11.0)[2] cd

Oops.  :-(  sorry for the noise.

Once I corrected that & re-tested... well, GENERIC built; ALBERT
is building as I type

Thanks for the reality check! :-}

Peace,
david
-- 
David H. Wolfskill  da...@catwhisker.org
Those who would murder in the name of God or prophet are blasphemous cowards.

See http://www.catwhisker.org/~david/publickey.gpg for my public key.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Building "extra" kernels in stable/11...?

[John]

On Sat, 16 Jul 2016, at 14:47, David Wolfskill wrote:

> Today, as part of my gradual ramp-up toward getting readyto test
> stable/11 on more than just the above build machine and my laptop, I
> figured I'd start building those extra kernels (along with GENERIC) when
> the build machine updated its stable/11.
> 
> Accordingly, I appended
> 
> KERNCONF?=GENERIC ALBERT BATS
> 
> to /etc/src.conf -- but the only kernel even attempted was GENERIC.  In
> reviewing the typescript (as I do all builds within script(1)), there
> was no indication that the kernel-building process had any awareness
> that anything other than GENERIC was wanted.
> 
> Have I managed to overlook something obvious (again)?

Hi,
I noticed this stopped working a couple of months ago. I don't put it in
src.conf though - mine goes in make.conf like this:

KERNCONF=CUSTOMKERNEL1 GENERIC

which means that both kernels would be built and installed with no
special parameters to the buildkernel and installkernel commands. Less
typing!

I first noticed it when after building and installing a new world, the
kernel came up with the warning that WITNESS was enabled (it's disabled
in the custom kernel). So I had to build and install another kernel with
the KERNCONF=CUSTOMKERNEL1 parameter. The problem happened at around the
time I noticed GENERIC-NODEBUG appearing in /sys/amd64/conf - though
this might be entirely coincidental.

This was a month or so ago. I'll re-enable KERNCONF= in my make.conf,
run another build and get back to you.

-- 
  John
  tech-li...@zyxst.net
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: Building "extra" kernels in stable/11...?

[John]

On Sat, 16 Jul 2016, at 21:56, David Wolfskill wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 05:45:11PM +0200, Herbert J. Skuhra wrote:
> > 
> > Well, I cannot reproduce this issue on my stable/11 machine.
> > 
> 
> For good reason.  It turns out that I was so *sure* I had my kernel
> config files (for ALBERT & BATS) in place thta I didn't even check to
> verify that.
> 
> And when I did:
> 
> freebeast(11.0)[1] ls -lT /usr/src/sys/amd64/conf/{GENERIC,ALBERT,BATS}
> ls: /usr/src/sys/amd64/conf/ALBERT: No such file or directory
> ls: /usr/src/sys/amd64/conf/BATS: No such file or directory
> -rw-r--r--  1 david  wheel  14315 Jul  8 04:00:47 2016
> /usr/src/sys/amd64/conf/GENERIC
> freebeast(11.0)[2] cd
> 
> Oops.  :-(  sorry for the noise.
> 
> Once I corrected that & re-tested... well, GENERIC built; ALBERT
> is building as I type

Hmm, your problem was different to mine then, because my config file was
in the expected place. Otherwise the KERNCONF= option when manually
applied wouldn't have worked. 

-- 
  John
  tech-li...@zyxst.net
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"