On Wed, Oct 28, 2026 at 12:41:24PM +0100, Antoine Jacoutot wrote: > On Wed, Oct 28, 2026 at 11:38:46AM +0000, Stuart Henderson wrote: > > On 2026/10/28 12:30, Theo Buehler wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 28, 2026 at 11:20:49AM +0000, Stuart Henderson wrote: > > > > On 2026/10/28 11:48, Kirill A. Korinsky wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Not a fan of this. > > > > > > kmos@ added the COMPILER line for sparc64 build at the time. I > > > > > > don't know what > > > > > > the error was and if it was fixable. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I had talked with kmos@, and he, as expected, hasn't recall nor have > > > > > logs of > > > > > that error. > > > > > > > > > > I also checked http://build-failures.rhaalovely.net/sparc64/ and here > > > > > to > > > > > trace of this. > > > > > > > > I don't see any error, I checked build logs. > > > > > > > > libxml-2.10.2 built ok with base compiler on sparc64 on 2022-08-31 > > > > > > > > The subsequent build on 2022-09-10 was with ports-gcc > > > > > > > > > > kmos often reduced the fallout in package snapshots by fixing things up > > > before the bulks finished. This is great for users. The downside is that > > > the logs of the failures were lost because (as I understand it) the > > > script only pushes out failures showing up in the summary.log. > > > > > > > aha, there are two builds in that log. errors are in libxml2-py.c; > > the python bindings are no longer built. > > Interesting, so just dropping the COMPILER line might be all we need?
No, it still creates a cycle: ports-gcc -> python -> meson -> libxml2 -> ports-gcc.
