Re: Chromium in the latest snapshot packages
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 04:19:42PM +, Christian Weisgerber wrote: | It's typical for a few ports to fail during a snapshot build. | Usually because of changes in the ports tree, sometimes because of | changes in base, sometimes just because a particular port doesn't | build reliably. | | ... this still holds true. The next snapshot may again have some | holes. Thanks for taking the time to explain this behaviour Christian, but most of all, thanks for the very frequent pkg snapshots you (and the other pkg builders) are pushing out. Your effort is greatly appreciated. Cheers, Paul 'WEiRD' de Weerd -- [++-]+++.+++[---].+++[+ +++-].++[-]+.--.[-] http://www.weirdnet.nl/
Re: Chromium in the latest snapshot packages
On 2015-06-22, Christian Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de wrote: The chromium build is very brittle and fails frequently in quasi-random ways. During the latest amd64 snapshot build, chromium errored out twice, in slightly different ways. I've uploaded new amd64 packages (Jun 25) that include chromium. In fact, no packages at all should be missing. However... It's typical for a few ports to fail during a snapshot build. Usually because of changes in the ports tree, sometimes because of changes in base, sometimes just because a particular port doesn't build reliably. ... this still holds true. The next snapshot may again have some holes. -- Christian naddy Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de
Re: Chromium in the latest snapshot packages
Thanks so much for letting me know. I appreciate it. I'll try a from source build and see how far I get. From talking to my friends on the openJDK project it sounds challenging but what the heck - never hurts to try. Thanks, Bryan On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 10:58 AM, Christian Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de wrote: On 2015-06-22, Bryan C. Everly br...@bceassociates.com wrote: I wiped and re-loaded my laptop over the weekend with the latest snapshots and noticed that Chromium isn't in the amd64 snapshot package directory on any of the mirrors I checked. Is there currently a problem with the build on that or should I bit the bullet and build from source? The chromium build is very brittle and fails frequently in quasi-random ways. During the latest amd64 snapshot build, chromium errored out twice, in slightly different ways. I'd be happy to send you the voluminous logs. It's quite possible that it will build just fine when you try it. Sorry if there was something that already went out on this and I missed it. It's typical for a few ports to fail during a snapshot build. Usually because of changes in the ports tree, sometimes because of changes in base, sometimes just because a particular port doesn't build reliably. I only send status mail to ports@ about it when there are persistent, accumulating, or otherwise serious problems. The latest build failures on amd64 were x11/virt-viewer, x11/vlc, www/chromium, and lang/ghc. Of these, virt-viewer has been fixed since, vlc is being investigated, chromium is more or less random (but the maintainer has been notified), and ghc is actually the most serious failure in one way, since it takes out all Haskell ports, but also harmless in another way, since it just needs a new bootstrap after the recent libc bump. That's business as usual on the package building front. -- Christian naddy Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de
Re: Chromium in the latest snapshot packages
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 02:58:37PM +, Christian Weisgerber wrote: On 2015-06-22, Bryan C. Everly br...@bceassociates.com wrote: I wiped and re-loaded my laptop over the weekend with the latest snapshots and noticed that Chromium isn't in the amd64 snapshot package directory on any of the mirrors I checked. Is there currently a problem with the build on that or should I bit the bullet and build from source? The chromium build is very brittle and fails frequently in quasi-random ways. During the latest amd64 snapshot build, chromium errored out twice, in slightly different ways. I'd be happy to send you the voluminous logs. It's generally reasonably simple to fix, just takes a while to go thru the logs and figure out which dependency was missed. That's one feature of ninja: it's geared towards making full parallel builds of a given port. But the gyp frontend that generates the ninja files is often incomplete. The chromium developers are very sloppy, and they forget to record lots of interdependencies. Figuring out one of these bugs is not complicated, it's just time-consuming. - look at the error in the log. - figure out which file wasn't generated, match it to the corresponding subset A in the gypi/gyp files. - figure out which file was being generated, match it to the corresponding subset B in the gypi/gyp files. - add the missing dependency between B and A in the file. - check out the patch works okay. If people want things to improve, it's simple: post out the failures you got, and ask people to look things over. It's not THAT complicated. Just time-consuming (and boring after you've done a few). It's something that, conceivably, newbie OpenBSD wannabe developers that want to help could try to tackle.
Re: Chromium in the latest snapshot packages
On 2015-06-22, Bryan C. Everly br...@bceassociates.com wrote: I wiped and re-loaded my laptop over the weekend with the latest snapshots and noticed that Chromium isn't in the amd64 snapshot package directory on any of the mirrors I checked. Is there currently a problem with the build on that or should I bit the bullet and build from source? The chromium build is very brittle and fails frequently in quasi-random ways. During the latest amd64 snapshot build, chromium errored out twice, in slightly different ways. I'd be happy to send you the voluminous logs. It's quite possible that it will build just fine when you try it. Sorry if there was something that already went out on this and I missed it. It's typical for a few ports to fail during a snapshot build. Usually because of changes in the ports tree, sometimes because of changes in base, sometimes just because a particular port doesn't build reliably. I only send status mail to ports@ about it when there are persistent, accumulating, or otherwise serious problems. The latest build failures on amd64 were x11/virt-viewer, x11/vlc, www/chromium, and lang/ghc. Of these, virt-viewer has been fixed since, vlc is being investigated, chromium is more or less random (but the maintainer has been notified), and ghc is actually the most serious failure in one way, since it takes out all Haskell ports, but also harmless in another way, since it just needs a new bootstrap after the recent libc bump. That's business as usual on the package building front. -- Christian naddy Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de
Re: Chromium in the latest snapshot packages
Anything I can do to help diagnose the problem? Thanks, Bryan On Jun 22, 2015, at 3:24 PM, Marc Espie es...@nerim.net wrote: On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 02:58:37PM +, Christian Weisgerber wrote: On 2015-06-22, Bryan C. Everly br...@bceassociates.com wrote: I wiped and re-loaded my laptop over the weekend with the latest snapshots and noticed that Chromium isn't in the amd64 snapshot package directory on any of the mirrors I checked. Is there currently a problem with the build on that or should I bit the bullet and build from source? The chromium build is very brittle and fails frequently in quasi-random ways. During the latest amd64 snapshot build, chromium errored out twice, in slightly different ways. I'd be happy to send you the voluminous logs. It's generally reasonably simple to fix, just takes a while to go thru the logs and figure out which dependency was missed. That's one feature of ninja: it's geared towards making full parallel builds of a given port. But the gyp frontend that generates the ninja files is often incomplete. The chromium developers are very sloppy, and they forget to record lots of interdependencies. Figuring out one of these bugs is not complicated, it's just time-consuming. - look at the error in the log. - figure out which file wasn't generated, match it to the corresponding subset A in the gypi/gyp files. - figure out which file was being generated, match it to the corresponding subset B in the gypi/gyp files. - add the missing dependency between B and A in the file. - check out the patch works okay. If people want things to improve, it's simple: post out the failures you got, and ask people to look things over. It's not THAT complicated. Just time-consuming (and boring after you've done a few). It's something that, conceivably, newbie OpenBSD wannabe developers that want to help could try to tackle.
Re: Chromium in the latest snapshot packages
It's possible that it's due to the recent controversy over the hello google blob --- âLanie, Iâm going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. Thatâs worth going to jail for. Thatâs worth anything.â - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 2:46 PM, Bryan C. Everly br...@bceassociates.com wrote: Hello all, I wiped and re-loaded my laptop over the weekend with the latest snapshots and noticed that Chromium isn't in the amd64 snapshot package directory on any of the mirrors I checked. Is there currently a problem with the build on that or should I bit the bullet and build from source? Sorry if there was something that already went out on this and I missed it. Thanks, Bryan
Chromium in the latest snapshot packages
Hello all, I wiped and re-loaded my laptop over the weekend with the latest snapshots and noticed that Chromium isn't in the amd64 snapshot package directory on any of the mirrors I checked. Is there currently a problem with the build on that or should I bit the bullet and build from source? Sorry if there was something that already went out on this and I missed it. Thanks, Bryan
