I finally got through the test builds of all the source packages in sid for
i386 using dpkg-buildpackage -j3 on a dual core machine. The results as
before are at http://people.debian.org/~schepler/build-logs/bymaint.html .
Some statistics:
204 built BROKEN packages
1408 FAILED
230 FAILED, even with regular build
8986 succeeded
1014 succeeded, but with jobserver warnings
These are not encouraging statistics, especially considering the fact that
there are undoubtedly many false negatives, so I'll hold off on submitting
bug reports for now.
--
Daniel Schepler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
12-02-2007, 07:29 AM
Michael Tautschnig
Parallel build results
> I finally got through the test builds of all the source packages in sid for
> i386 using dpkg-buildpackage -j3 on a dual core machine. The results as
> before are at http://people.debian.org/~schepler/build-logs/bymaint.html .
> Some statistics:
>
[...]
Wouldn't it have been wise to use lenny (or even etch) instead of sid?
Apparently your statistics include all the failures due to "normal" bugs
entirely unrelated to the parallel build process.
Best,
Michael
12-02-2007, 07:34 AM
Michael Tautschnig
Parallel build results
> I finally got through the test builds of all the source packages in sid for
> i386 using dpkg-buildpackage -j3 on a dual core machine. The results as
> before are at http://people.debian.org/~schepler/build-logs/bymaint.html .
> Some statistics:
>
[...]
BTW, Daniel, it would be nice if you provided a detailed description of the
exact build environment you use, i.e., kernel version, libc version, gcc, ...
Thanks,
Michael
12-02-2007, 09:50 AM
Lucas Nussbaum
Parallel build results
On 01/12/07 at 21:21 -0500, Daniel Schepler wrote:
> I finally got through the test builds of all the source packages in sid for
> i386 using dpkg-buildpackage -j3 on a dual core machine. The results as
> before are at http://people.debian.org/~schepler/build-logs/bymaint.html .
> Some statistics:
>
> 204 built BROKEN packages
> 1408 FAILED
> 230 FAILED, even with regular build
> 8986 succeeded
> 1014 succeeded, but with jobserver warnings
>
> These are not encouraging statistics, especially considering the fact that
> there are undoubtedly many false negatives, so I'll hold off on submitting
> bug reports for now.
According to those numbers, I don't really see how it could become a
viable solution to require that packages support building using
dpkg-buildpackage -j.
This option is nice for maintainers, to build their own packages, but it
seems better to push #209008 instead, so packages that take a long time
to build have a common interface to specify that parallel builds.
--
| Lucas Nussbaum
| lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ |
| jabber: lucas@nussbaum.fr GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
12-02-2007, 05:24 PM
"Bernhard R. Link"
Parallel build results
* Daniel Schepler <schepler@math.unipd.it> [071202 03:39]:
> I finally got through the test builds of all the source packages in sid for
> i386 using dpkg-buildpackage -j3 on a dual core machine. The results as
> before are at http://people.debian.org/~schepler/build-logs/bymaint.html .
| xbuffy: succeeded, but with jobserver warnings
thanks for catching this, should be fixed with the upload of today.
> These are not encouraging statistics, especially considering the fact that
> there are undoubtedly many false negatives, so I'll hold off on submitting
> bug reports for now.
Glancing over some of the failed build logs, suprisingly many of them
seem even be caused by broken debian/rules files.
actually works with -j1. (Well, it will only work when special targets
are specified).
I think going after such errors has much more advantages than just
allowing hosts with multiple processors to build faster, such stuff
should never be allowed to sneak in.
Hochachtungsvoll,
Bernhard R. Link
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
12-02-2007, 06:12 PM
Patrick Schoenfeld
Parallel build results
Hi,
On Sat, Dec 01, 2007 at 09:21:33PM -0500, Daniel Schepler wrote:
> i386 using dpkg-buildpackage -j3 on a dual core machine. The results as
> before are at http://people.debian.org/~schepler/build-logs/bymaint.html .
I am not sure how to handle these problems with my packages. Currently
there are two packages failing. detox and dnsproxy. dnsproxy should be
simply (moving config.status depend to build-stamp instead of build),
but with detox I don't really know what to do.
Relevant parts for detox are:
/usr/bin/install -c -d /tmp/buildd/detox-1.1.1/debian/tmp/etc
/usr/bin/install: cannot create regular file
`/tmp/buildd/detox-1.1.1/debian/tmp/etc/detoxrc.sample': No such file or
directory
make[1]: *** [install-sample-config] Error 1
make[1]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
/usr/bin/install: `/tmp/buildd/detox-1.1.1/debian/tmp/etc' exists but is
not a directory
make[1]: *** [install-base] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory `/tmp/buildd/detox-1.1.1'
So I assume the first install command for debian/tmp/etc was not
successful? I'm not very experienced with parallel builds and I cannot
reproduce this on my single-core-systems. So: Is there some
documentation or hints on how to make package building be parallel-safe?
Regards,
Patrick
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
12-02-2007, 10:13 PM
Ben Hutchings
Parallel build results
On Sat, 2007-12-01 at 21:21 -0500, Daniel Schepler wrote:
> I finally got through the test builds of all the source packages in sid for
> i386 using dpkg-buildpackage -j3 on a dual core machine. The results as
> before are at http://people.debian.org/~schepler/build-logs/bymaint.html .
> Some statistics:
>
> 204 built BROKEN packages
> 1408 FAILED
> 230 FAILED, even with regular build
> 8986 succeeded
> 1014 succeeded, but with jobserver warnings
>
> These are not encouraging statistics, especially considering the fact that
> there are undoubtedly many false negatives, so I'll hold off on submitting
> bug reports for now.
It appears that ExtUtils::MakeMaker, a standard Perl module commonly
used to generate Makefiles for Perl modules, emits the rule:
install :: all pure_install doc_install
This appears to account for the failure of some of my Perl packages, and
probably many others. This should be fixed in MakeMaker, not in the
packages that use it.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
The most exhausting thing in life is being insincere. - Anne Morrow Lindberg
12-02-2007, 10:42 PM
Daniel Schepler
Parallel build results
On Sunday 02 December 2007 02:12:40 pm Patrick Schoenfeld wrote:
> Relevant parts for detox are:
> /usr/bin/install -c -d /tmp/buildd/detox-1.1.1/debian/tmp/etc
> /usr/bin/install: cannot create regular file
> `/tmp/buildd/detox-1.1.1/debian/tmp/etc/detoxrc.sample': No such file or
> directory
> make[1]: *** [install-sample-config] Error 1
> make[1]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
> /usr/bin/install: `/tmp/buildd/detox-1.1.1/debian/tmp/etc' exists but is
> not a directory
> make[1]: *** [install-base] Error 1
> make[1]: Leaving directory `/tmp/buildd/detox-1.1.1'
which failed because debian/tmp/etc was not yet created. So it appears the
upstream package's Makefile is not parallel-safe, at least with regards to
the install target.
--
Daniel Schepler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
12-03-2007, 07:50 AM
Parallel build results
On Dec 02, Daniel Schepler <schepler@math.unipd.it> wrote:
> I finally got through the test builds of all the source packages in sid for
> i386 using dpkg-buildpackage -j3 on a dual core machine. The results as
> before are at http://people.debian.org/~schepler/build-logs/bymaint.html .
Can you explain the meaning of this failure and how it should be fixed?
make[2]: warning: jobserver unavailable: using -j1. Add `+' to parent make rule.
--
ciao,
Marco
12-03-2007, 09:11 AM
Tim Cutts
Parallel build results
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 2 Dec 2007, at 2:21 am, Daniel Schepler wrote:
I finally got through the test builds of all the source packages in
sid for
i386 using dpkg-buildpackage -j3 on a dual core machine. The
results as
before are at http://people.debian.org/~schepler/build-logs/bymaint.html
.
Some statistics:
204 built BROKEN packages
1408 FAILED
230 FAILED, even with regular build
8986 succeeded
1014 succeeded, but with jobserver warnings
These are not encouraging statistics, especially considering the
fact that
there are undoubtedly many false negatives, so I'll hold off on
submitting
bug reports for now.
Well, am-utils lists as building broken packages, but when I looked at
the log, it was just that the parallel build had produced the multiple
binary packages in a different order from the serial build. At least,
that's my interpretation of the following from debdiff:
Files moved or copied from at least TWO packages or to at least TWO
packages
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- -rw-r--r-- root/root DEBIAN/control
From packages: am-utils-doc, am-utils, libamu4, libamu-dev
To packages: am-utils-doc, libamu4, libamu-dev, am-utils
- -rw-r--r-- root/root DEBIAN/md5sums
From packages: am-utils-doc, am-utils, libamu4, libamu-dev
To packages: am-utils-doc, libamu4, libamu-dev, am-utils
- -rwxr-xr-x root/root DEBIAN/postinst
From packages: am-utils-doc, am-utils, libamu4
To packages: am-utils-doc, libamu4, am-utils
- -rwxr-xr-x root/root DEBIAN/postrm
From packages: am-utils, libamu4
To packages: libamu4, am-utils
Or does that mean something more basic that's wrong with the packages?
Tim
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin)
--
The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute is operated by Genome Research
Limited, a charity registered in England with number 1021457 and a
company registered in England with number 2742969, whose registered
office is 215 Euston Road, London, NW1 2BE.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Parallel build results
