Your message dated Sat, 2 Apr 2011 17:21:00 +0200
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: [Build-common-hackers] Bug#620350: cdbs fails when
building in parallel
has caused the Debian Bug report #620350,
regarding cdbs fails when building in parallel
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
620350: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=620350
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
package: cdbs
version: 0.4.92
Cdbs fails when building in parallel.
When building cdbs on the opensuse buildservice (obs), cdbs fails. Obs
uses parallel building by default.
Here is some debug info:
> PASS: distutils-8.sh
> FAIL: distutils-9.sh
> FAIL: distutils-10.sh
> FAIL: distutils-11.sh
> PASS: ant-1.sh
> ====================
> 3 of 30 tests failed
> ====================
Checking the current build failures on the linked project, the tests
actually pass all fine (even though it seems to be only 28 checks)
The builds abort due to a 'build appears to be stuck' error => trying a
local build shows that bash is actually dieing:
\_ /usr/bin/make install-am
\_ /usr/bin/make install-exec-am install-data-am
\_ [bash]<defunct>
\_ [bash]<defunct>
\_ [bash]<defunct>
So the clue is actually to find out why bash defunts on us in our build
environment.
A small verification with osc build -j 1 shows that once more, debian
stuff just does not work properly in parallel builds...
Here is a comment on the obs mailinglist:
And what would the packager do to enable parallel builds ?
He would do some bash scripting in the rules file to get the # of parallel
builds to from the DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS env variable and then calls make with the
parsed argument which is butt ugly to say it politely.
IMHO the debian way plain sucks and shouldn't be repeated. Instead some
"DISABLE_PARALLEL_BUILD=1" in the packages meta data is much preferable.
See alsohttp://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-source.html section 4.9.1
(besides that parallel builds being broken_IS_ a bug in the packages build
system which should be filed upstream and not at debian)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 12:41:25PM +0200, rosea.grammostola wrote:
When building cdbs on the opensuse buildservice (obs), cdbs fails.
Obs uses parallel building by default.
I believe this can only happen if obs plays tricks to enforce parallel
building - e.g. directly sets make option -j - which is unsupported.
Obs should follow Debian Policy §4.9.1 and only _request_ the use of
parallel building with DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=parallel=n.
I am therefore closing this as a non-bug. You are quite welcome to
continue posting to this bugreport (closed does not mean closed for
debate), to try convince us that this is in fact a bug in this package,
not in your build environment.
A small verification with osc build -j 1 shows that once more, debian
stuff just does not work properly in parallel builds...
...or it simply shows that obs is failing in its attempts to outsmart
explicitly documented behaviour of Debian.
And what would the packager do to enable parallel builds ?
He would do some bash scripting in the rules file to get the # of
parallel builds to from the DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS env variable and then
calls make with the parsed argument which is butt ugly to say it
politely.
This is butt ugly?:
DEB_BUILD_PARALLEL=yes
Please note that above deliberately was _not_ added to the CDBS
packaging, because we - the package maintainers of CDBS - did not feel
that "the package build times are long enough and the package build
system is robust enough to make supporting parallel builds worthwhile"
as it is phrased in Debian Policy §4.9.1.
IMHO the debian way plain sucks
Plonk!
If Debian is so crappy, then don't bother recompiling it! :-P
If you try rephrase in a more friendly tone, then perhaps an explanation
on the sanity of the Debian approach might be provided.
Have a nice day,
- Jonas
--
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
[x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
--- End Message ---
