Re: CI: The "cross-build" job doesn't have EVP_MD_CTX_new

On Sat, Sep 07, 2024 at 05:43:32PM -0700, Hal Murray via devel wrote: > > Thanks > > James said: > >It is one of many jobs set up to fail withou fanfare. Nobody was > >checking up on them on the pipelines tab at GitLab. > > Why do we have those jobs? I think the idea at the time was th

Re: CI: The "cross-build" job doesn't have EVP_MD_CTX_new

On Sat, Sep 07, 2024 at 04:14:52PM -0500, Dan Drown via devel wrote: >Ubuntu 16.04 is pretty old, does it need to be supported? Nope. I've removed this CI target. https://gitlab.com/NTPsec/ntpsec/-/commit/5af01fe36a66b60496fcdf7bcfc31334370cff1b Cheers, -Matt __

re: CI: The "cross-build" job doesn't have EVP_MD_CTX_new

On Sat, 7 Sep 2024, Hal Murray via devel wrote: Does #ifdef work on functions? I thought not, but the old code looks like its doing that. It only works when the apparent functions are macros. The preprocessor knows nothing about functions. On Sat, 7 Sep 2024, Hal Murray via devel wrote:

Re: CI: The "cross-build" job doesn't have EVP_MD_CTX_new

Gary said: >> >It is one of many jobs set up to fail withou fanfare. Nobody was >> >checking up on them on the pipelines tab at GitLab. >> Why do we have those jobs? > To test commits that they don't break the build. Right. But if they fail silently nobody notices that something is bro

Re: CI: The "cross-build" job doesn't have EVP_MD_CTX_new

Yo Hal! On Sat, 07 Sep 2024 17:43:32 -0700 Hal Murray via devel wrote: > James said: > >It is one of many jobs set up to fail withou fanfare. Nobody was > >checking up on them on the pipelines tab at GitLab. > > Why do we have those jobs? To test commits that they don't break the bu

Re: CI: The "cross-build" job doesn't have EVP_MD_CTX_new

> some twenty one of them build docker images weekly, Does anybody test them? Who gets the output of weekly builds? > Which of these jobs should become noisy and which ones should go away? If we are going to run a job, somebody should check the results. So I vote that all are noisy. If we

Re: CI: The "cross-build" job doesn't have EVP_MD_CTX_new

Thanks James said: >It is one of many jobs set up to fail withou fanfare. Nobody was >checking up on them on the pipelines tab at GitLab. Why do we have those jobs? >> Do we have a web page that describes our support policy? >Besides https://www.ntpsec.org/supported-platforms.ht

re: CI: The "cross-build" job doesn't have EVP_MD_CTX_new

  On 09/07/2024 3:49 PM PDT Hal Murray via devel wrote:     I assume it's from this change: https://gitlab.com/NTPsec/ntpsec/-/commit/ 7c8b5fe20eafe911be4eac64467a032a52753313#887b5ad6972aa0

re: CI: The "cross-build" job doesn't have EVP_MD_CTX_new

> I assume it's from this change: https://gitlab.com/NTPsec/ntpsec/-/commit/ > 7c8b5fe20eafe911be4eac64467a032a52753313#887b5ad6972aa02f9a0434c248cd872a9 > 94e6fc5_44_41 Thanks. Yes. That would explain this problem. But that cleanup went in back in June. Why didn't we notice this problem ear

Re: CI: The "cross-build" job doesn't have EVP_MD_CTX_new()

Yo James! On Sat, 07 Sep 2024 10:14:57 -0700 James Browning via devel wrote: > The Ubuntu 16 04 "cross-build" job is busted and I have no idea how > to fix it. I thought one idea behind the "build-cross-armhf" job was > that "cross-build" would have gone away. I have no idea about Ubuntu or cro