Re: stable postgresql11 appears to have issues
On 6/26/20, Donald Wilde wrote: > On 6/26/20, Christoph Moench-Tegeder wrote: >> ## Donald Wilde (dwil...@gmail.com): >> >>> This is 12-STABLE as of a few days ago, and yes, it's running on >>> amd64/HAMMER. >> >> So, llvm 10. As I guessed :) >> An update. Synth is still crashing and I am attempting to also solve that one in another thread. On this front, while working with synth I noticed that the /usr/ports/distfiles directory no longer seems to be created and used by default. Synth asked me to create one outside of the ports tree and add it to make.conf. I did so, To cut to the chase, this caused a whole slew of issues. The postgresql11-server package created its own /usr/ports/distfiles/postgresql directory, ignoring my setting of DISTFILES=/var/distfiles, and all the dependencies of pg11 crashed for the same reason. Removing that new directory and accepting /usr/ports/distfiles as an "is so" fact of life seems to have allowed the pg11 build to go forward. The workaround in make.conf for DEFAULT_VERSIONS+=llvm=10 is in there as well. Back to the other thread in -stable! -- Don Wilde * What is the Internet of Things but a system * * of systems including humans? * ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: stable postgresql11 appears to have issues
On 6/26/20, Christoph Moench-Tegeder wrote: > ## Donald Wilde (dwil...@gmail.com): > >> This is 12-STABLE as of a few days ago, and yes, it's running on >> amd64/HAMMER. > > So, llvm 10. As I guessed :) > >> I'll see if I can figure out how to get the 'configure output' from a >> port... That does seem to be a useful thing to know! > > That might be the point to look into poudriere: > https://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/ports-poudriere.html > It does not leave half-compiled ports lying around and does a very good > job of collecting build logs and managing dependencies. > Anyways, "configure" is - for PostgreSQL and some other software - > the first stage of the build process, where it figures out the > build environment and, well, configures the build process > Perhaps using packages would get you off the ground faster (and > will save some electricity) - figuring out FreeBSD and the ports > system while learning how to build software from source is > at least three variables at one and a very steep learning curve. > >> Cristoph, I am installing ports as they come, out of the box. The >> reality is that many ports still use LLVM80, and, even worse, gcc6. > > That would be gcc9, as there's no gcc6 around anymore? Else, there's > something very wrong. I saw that it (llvm80) now uses something called 'gcc6-aux' and no longer gcc6. As you say. 7 and 8 are still there, but I have yet to install a port that references them. gcc9 seems to be the current stable gcc. As to your point, Pete, I do install from packages in some cases, but I've gotten involved with making 'synth upgrade-system' work. It wants to use the ports rather than packages, unless you change its defaults. At this point I only use packages to resolve circular dependencies, such as on graphviz and doxygen. As much as I want to end up with a system that implements what I need for the project, this mule is intended to be a _learning_ system. It may not be the fastest dancing bear around, but I _will_ learn to teach her to dance. Cristoph, I've only touched on poudriere. I'll take your advice and study it further. TY! -- Don Wilde * What is the Internet of Things but a system * * of systems including humans? * ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: stable postgresql11 appears to have issues
On 6/26/20, Donald Wilde wrote: > On 6/26/20, Christoph Moench-Tegeder wrote: >> ## Donald Wilde (dwil...@gmail.com): [snip] >> I can see about two options to get out of that situation: >> - disable option LLVM on postgresql*-server, or >> - make sure there's only one llvm version involved > > Cristoph, I am installing ports as they come, out of the box. The > reality is that many ports still use LLVM80, and, even worse, gcc6. > ... and even worse worse, python27 and ruby26! I don't envy you guys, but I do truly appreciate you all. :D -- Don Wilde * What is the Internet of Things but a system * * of systems including humans? * ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: stable postgresql11 appears to have issues
On 6/26/20, Christoph Moench-Tegeder wrote: > ## Donald Wilde (dwil...@gmail.com): > >> I ran into an issue, documented in the attachments, that seems to >> point to some quantity that does not include version 8 of the port, >> only 1 - 7. Being a tidy soul, I used make clean first and that >> resulted in a rebuild of LLVM90 as well. > > This report misses some vital information - e.g. what version of > FreeBSD this is (and I'm only guessing this is on amd64), which > would give some clue what the base compiler is. The attachments > are somewhat incomplete, too - did you even have a look at > llvm90_makeinstall.txt? Especially the configure output from > PostgreSQL could have been helpful. Christoph, please bear with me. It's been long enough since I worked with FreeBSD that I don't even know what "vital information" I'm not giving you. I'm peddling as fast as I can, and loving every minute, but I'm not "there" yet. This is 12-STABLE as of a few days ago, and yes, it's running on amd64/HAMMER. I'll see if I can figure out how to get the 'configure output' from a port... That does seem to be a useful thing to know! [snip] > I can see about two options to get out of that situation: > - disable option LLVM on postgresql*-server, or > - make sure there's only one llvm version involved Cristoph, I am installing ports as they come, out of the box. The reality is that many ports still use LLVM80, and, even worse, gcc6. I truly 'get' that you maintainers (too) are peddling as fast as you can! :D I've applied Martin's workaround to my /etc/make.conf. I am in the process of rebuilding the whole mule again as advice in response to an earlier question left me with a very moth-eaten disk. We'll see if it's happy this time! -- Don Wilde * What is the Internet of Things but a system * * of systems including humans? * ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
general R4I on ports
Folks, Not to start a flame war, but I've had a few issues in the ports tree, as STABLE readers have no doubt seen. This is a Request for Insights. IMHO, it's a black hole to stay current with ports designed to utilize GNU tools, especially documentation tools. I realize that given the complexity and size of the ports tree, eliminating GPL ports would cut out a huge swath of cool stuff, especially considering the ongoing EOL crisis in our SW world. I was looking at flex and bison, as examples. Flex is BSD-licensed, but bison is not. Byacc, however, is Public Domain. I would like to create an end-point system using FreeBSD that is BSD-clean insofar as licensing is concerned. I know that I am not alone in desiring this. We do have lots of Big GoshWhatta(tm) Corporations using FreeBSD, and the cleaner we can make it the happier their lawyers would be. I do realize that I can determine the dependencies of ports before I install them, and, because I am building a mule for pushing and shoving and developing, I choose to install docs, which in most cases kicks me into the black hole, but I'd like to offer a diffident suggestion. Could we initialize a /usr/ports/bsd tree, which would mirror /usr/ports (as it is developed) with bsd/devel, bsd/lang, etc.? I realize that there are far too few people smart and experienced enough to be committers and maintainers, but it seems that if one is familiar (much more than I am now) with the process and the individual ports, making a BSD-clean port would be possible for you guys. First by pruning things like non-BSD non-text documentation, etc, but then getting more ambitious like re-writing for byacc instead of bison and clang instead of g++. I know that Knuth used to do lots of cool docs with his TeX and other ideas. I'm not asking you to create a BSD world by magic wand, but maybe if the hooks were there some would accept the challenge. Who knows, maybe I'll get educated enough to have the courage to try it myself! -- Don Wilde * What is the Internet of Things but a system * * of systems including humans? * ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
