Re: Building multiple kernels with "make release"

It is on my list of things to look into next week. Glen Sent from my phone. Please excuse my brevity and/or typos. > On Aug 20, 2021, at 4:10 PM, Alan Somers wrote: > >  >> On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 12:43 PM Emmanuel Vadot >> wrote: >> On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 00:13:54 + >> Glen Barber wrote:

Re: Building multiple kernels with "make release"

On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 12:43 PM Emmanuel Vadot wrote: > On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 00:13:54 + > Glen Barber wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 06:00:28PM -0600, Alan Somers wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 5:52 PM Miroslav Lachman <000.f...@quip.cz> > wrote: > > > > > > > On 28/07/2021 20:46

Re: Building multiple kernels with "make release"

On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 00:13:54 + Glen Barber wrote: > On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 06:00:28PM -0600, Alan Somers wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 5:52 PM Miroslav Lachman <000.f...@quip.cz> wrote: > > > > > On 28/07/2021 20:46, Juraj Lutter wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >> On 28 Jul 2021, at 20:37

Re: Building multiple kernels with "make release"

On 2021-07-28 10:11, Alan Somers wrote: Is it possible to build multiple different kernels and include them all in a release image? release.conf says so. But from experiment, what I see is that: * release.sh does pass both kernels in the KERNCONF variable to "make buildkernel" * "make buildker

Re: Building multiple kernels with "make release"

On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 06:00:28PM -0600, Alan Somers wrote: > On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 5:52 PM Miroslav Lachman <000.f...@quip.cz> wrote: > > > On 28/07/2021 20:46, Juraj Lutter wrote: > > > > > > > > >> On 28 Jul 2021, at 20:37, Glen Barber wrote: > > >> > > >> On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 12:05:25PM

Re: Building multiple kernels with "make release"

On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 5:52 PM Miroslav Lachman <000.f...@quip.cz> wrote: > On 28/07/2021 20:46, Juraj Lutter wrote: > > > > > >> On 28 Jul 2021, at 20:37, Glen Barber wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 12:05:25PM -0600, Alan Somers wrote: > >>> On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 11:57 AM Glen Barber

Re: Building multiple kernels with "make release"

On 28/07/2021 20:46, Juraj Lutter wrote: On 28 Jul 2021, at 20:37, Glen Barber wrote: On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 12:05:25PM -0600, Alan Somers wrote: On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 11:57 AM Glen Barber wrote: Just on a hunch, could you try with adding INSTALLKERNEL="${KERNEL}" to your release.conf?

Re: Building multiple kernels with "make release"

On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 08:46:19PM +0200, Juraj Lutter wrote: > > > > On 28 Jul 2021, at 20:37, Glen Barber wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 12:05:25PM -0600, Alan Somers wrote: > >> On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 11:57 AM Glen Barber wrote: > >>> Just on a hunch, could you try with adding INST

Re: Building multiple kernels with "make release"

> On 28 Jul 2021, at 20:37, Glen Barber wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 12:05:25PM -0600, Alan Somers wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 11:57 AM Glen Barber wrote: >>> Just on a hunch, could you try with adding INSTALLKERNEL="${KERNEL}" to >>> your release.conf? >>> >>> I now seem to recal

Re: Building multiple kernels with "make release"

On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 12:05:25PM -0600, Alan Somers wrote: > On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 11:57 AM Glen Barber wrote: > > Just on a hunch, could you try with adding INSTALLKERNEL="${KERNEL}" to > > your release.conf? > > > > I now seem to recall some weirdness with this, but the exact details > > elu

Re: Building multiple kernels with "make release"

gt; > > > provide a way to specify that. > > > > > > > > > > > > So is the "multiple kernels in release.conf" feature > unfinished? If > > > > so, > > > > > > does anybody have a good idea about the best way to fi

Re: Building multiple kernels with "make release"

> > so, > > > > > does anybody have a good idea about the best way to finish it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-src/blob/7045b1603bdf054145dd958a4acc17b410fb62a0/release/release.conf.sample#L32 > > > > >

Re: Building multiple kernels with "make release"

y that. > > > > > > > > So is the "multiple kernels in release.conf" feature unfinished? If > > so, > > > > does anybody have a good idea about the best way to finish it? > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-sr

Re: Building multiple kernels with "make release"

e best way to finish it? > > > > > > > https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-src/blob/7045b1603bdf054145dd958a4acc17b410fb62a0/release/release.conf.sample#L32 > > > > > > > Last I was aware, based on a patch sent to me privately, I believe, it > > should work. > > > > Let me take a look. > > > > Oh, wait. Are you using 'make release' or release/release.sh? > > Glen > I'm using release.sh. I thought that was just a wrapper for "make release".

Re: Building multiple kernels with "make release"

> So is the "multiple kernels in release.conf" feature unfinished? If so, > > does anybody have a good idea about the best way to finish it? > > > > https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-src/blob/7045b1603bdf054145dd958a4acc17b410fb62a0/release/release.conf.sampl

Re: Building multiple kernels with "make release"

On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 11:11:48AM -0600, Alan Somers wrote: > Is it possible to build multiple different kernels and include them all in > a release image? release.conf says so. But from experiment, what I see is > that: > > * release.sh does pass both kernels in the KERNCONF variable to "make

Building multiple kernels with "make release"

Is it possible to build multiple different kernels and include them all in a release image? release.conf says so. But from experiment, what I see is that: * release.sh does pass both kernels in the KERNCONF variable to "make buildkernel" * "make buildkernel" dutifully builds both * BUT, "make in

make release broken?

Any ideas what broke this? -- >>> Kernel build for GENERIC completed on Tue Feb  9 20:48:05 UTC 2021 -- >>> Kernel(s)  GENERIC built in 465 seconds, ncpu: 8, make -j8 -

Re: trying to make release with git-derived 14-current

On 30/01/2021 17:23, tech-lists wrote: Hi, I'm trying to make release with -current on a rpi4b/8GB. Basically, I have a working rpi4B/8GB with a no-debug kernel running -current. However, release(7) says a lot about svn and nothing about git. What's the method with git? thanks,

trying to make release with git-derived 14-current

Hi, I'm trying to make release with -current on a rpi4b/8GB. Basically, I have a working rpi4B/8GB with a no-debug kernel running -current. However, release(7) says a lot about svn and nothing about git. What's the method with git? thanks, -- J. signature.asc Description: PGP signature

make release with i386 target now fails

I'm sure I did this yesterday without a failure; any hints as to what broke/how to fix it? imb ===> tests/sys/cddl/zfs/tests/threadsappend (all) ===> tests/sys/cddl/zfs/tests/truncate (all) ===> usr.sbin/amd/libamu (all) ===> usr.sbin/audit (all) ===> tests/sys/cddl/zfs/tests/txg_integrit

Re: make release: how utilise filemon?

-j $(( $(( $(sysctl -n hw.ncpu) + 1 )) / 2 ))" > > without any noticable effect - make release always build release fully, no > matter wether there has been new sources checked out or not. It takes a lot of > time compiling llvm/clang. Using 11-stable on a NanoBSD installation,

make release: how utilise filemon?

ee is 11-STABLE. In release.conf, I tried setting ## Set to use world- and kernel-specific make(1) flags. WORLD_FLAGS="-DNO_CLEAN -j $(sysctl -n hw.ncpu)" KERNEL_FLAGS="-DNO_CLEAN -j $(( $(( $(sysctl -n hw.ncpu) + 1 )) / 2 ))" without any noticable effect - make release alway

make release vs jenkins

We use jenkins to build, test and release 11.0-CURRENT using jenkin's uid:gid. Everything works well up to "install -o root -g wheel" in "make release". Anyone know what the use case is for requiring release to be built as root? Roger __

Re: make release fails...

In part, yes. Glen On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:41:54AM +0900, Lundberg, Johannes wrote: > Is this perhaps related to the 20130905 post in UPDATING, regarding the > Capsicum framework? > > -- > Johannes Lundberg > Project leader and lead developer of Mirama OS (previously Viking OS) > BRILLIANTSER

Re: make release fails...

Yes, the buildworld/buildkernel. Glen On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:37:38AM +0900, Lundberg, Johannes wrote: > Oh.. Thanks a lot! > > But please tell me, how can I upgrade the build environment? Do I have to > rebuild world and kernel on the host system? > > -- > Johannes Lundberg > Project leader

Re: make release fails...

Oh.. Thanks a lot! But please tell me, how can I upgrade the build environment? Do I have to rebuild world and kernel on the host system? -- Johannes Lundberg Project leader and lead developer of Mirama OS (previously Viking OS) BRILLIANTSERVICE CO., LTD. My blog

Re: make release fails...

Is this perhaps related to the 20130905 post in UPDATING, regarding the Capsicum framework? -- Johannes Lundberg Project leader and lead developer of Mirama OS (previously Viking OS) BRILLIANTSERVICE CO., LTD. My blog Mirama homepage

Re: make release fails...

On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:30:44AM +0900, Lundberg, Johannes wrote: > # sysctl -n kern.osreldate > 145 > > The system is 10.0. I used it before to build custom distribution. > What I've done since last time is basically removing /usr/src and grabbing > a new one from head. Recent changes in h

Re: make release fails...

> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:21:43AM +0900, Lundberg, Johannes wrote: > > Trying to create a custom install image which has been successful before > > but suddenly fails during make release/memstick. > > > > Procedure > > > > 1) cd /usr/src > > 2) mak

make release fails...

Hi Trying to create a custom install image which has been successful before but suddenly fails during make release/memstick. Procedure 1) cd /usr/src 2) make buildworld 3) make buildkernel 4) cd release 5) make release and I get the error ... gencat be_BY.UTF-8.cat /usr/src/lib/libc/nls

Re: make release fails...

On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:21:43AM +0900, Lundberg, Johannes wrote: > Trying to create a custom install image which has been successful before > but suddenly fails during make release/memstick. > > Procedure > > 1) cd /usr/src > 2) make buildworld > 3) make buildkernel &

Re: make release recursion

Alexander Pyhalov wrote: >Hello. > >On 07/28/2012 00:09, Glen Barber wrote: >> Hello, >> >> On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 09:35:13AM +0400, Alexander Pyhalov wrote: >>> Hello. >>> I've tried to do "make cdrom" on recent 10-current (svn revision >238763) >>> and got after day of work: >>> >> >> [...] >>

Re: make release recursion

Hello, On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 09:35:13AM +0400, Alexander Pyhalov wrote: > Hello. > I've tried to do "make cdrom" on recent 10-current (svn revision 238763) > and got after day of work: > [...] Could you please retry the cdrom build with NOSRC=yes set? If this does not succeed, could you ple

Re: make release recursion

On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 8:37 AM, Garrett Cooper wrote: > On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 7:26 AM, Oliver Brandmueller wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 09:35:13AM +0400, Alexander Pyhalov wrote: >>> Hello. >>> I've tried to do "make cdrom" on recent 10-current (svn revision 238763) >>> and got

Re: make release recursion

On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 7:26 AM, Oliver Brandmueller wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 09:35:13AM +0400, Alexander Pyhalov wrote: >> Hello. >> I've tried to do "make cdrom" on recent 10-current (svn revision 238763) >> and got after day of work: > [...] >> It seems, it continued to add file

Re: make release recursion

Hi, On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 09:35:13AM +0400, Alexander Pyhalov wrote: > Hello. > I've tried to do "make cdrom" on recent 10-current (svn revision 238763) > and got after day of work: [...] > It seems, it continued to add files to some archive recursively... Is it > a bug or maybe I just can't c

make release recursion

Hello. I've tried to do "make cdrom" on recent 10-current (svn revision 238763) and got after day of work: a usr/src/release/dist/usr/src/release/dist/usr/src/release/dist/usr/src/release/dist/usr/src/release/dist/usr/src/release/dist/usr/src/release/dist/usr/src/release/dist/usr/src/release/d

CURRENT as of 5/8/2012 make release

Ive noticed trying a make release on CURRENT that it appears to be looping deeper and deeper, does this appear normal to anyone else??? a usr/src/release/dist/usr/src/release/dist/usr/src/release/dist/usr/src/sys/dev/malo/if_malohal.h a usr/src/release/dist/usr/src/release/dist/usr/src/release

Re: make release: doesn't work for me, getting

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 8:47 AM, Kim Culhan wrote: > Attempting to run: make release resulted in 'looping' until a kernel compile > directory > sys/amd64/compile/* was removed. > > Maybe I missed something in the docs. > > -kim > ___

Re: make release: doesn't work for me, getting

Attempting to run: make release resulted in 'looping' until a kernel compile directory sys/amd64/compile/* was removed. Maybe I missed something in the docs. -kim ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailma

Re: make release: doesn't work for me, getting recursive looping

On 06/18/11 17:35, Nathan Whitehorn wrote: On 06/18/11 05:15, Hartmann, O. wrote: Try to build a cdrom from most recent CURRENT/amd64 sources. Issuing the follwing command fails the build process looping recursively and indefinitely within the source folder /usr/src/release: make release

Re: make release: doesn't work for me, getting recursive looping

On 06/18/11 05:15, Hartmann, O. wrote: Try to build a cdrom from most recent CURRENT/amd64 sources. Issuing the follwing command fails the build process looping recursively and indefinitely within the source folder /usr/src/release: make release cdrom CHROOTDIR=/unused/release/9.0/ SVNROOT

make release: doesn't work for me, getting recursive looping

Try to build a cdrom from most recent CURRENT/amd64 sources. Issuing the follwing command fails the build process looping recursively and indefinitely within the source folder /usr/src/release: make release cdrom CHROOTDIR=/unused/release/9.0/ SVNROOT/usr/src BUILDNAME=9.0-CURRENT

Re: make release

upN.freebsd.org sh generate-release.sh head /local3/release On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 6:14 PM, Nathan Whitehorn wrote: > On 04/12/11 10:02, George Kontostanos wrote: > >> I am trying to make a release with the following arguments: >> >> make release CHROOTDIR=/usr/home/curren

Re: make release

On 04/12/11 10:02, George Kontostanos wrote: I am trying to make a release with the following arguments: make release CHROOTDIR=/usr/home/current BUILDNAME=9-CURRENT EXTSRCDIR=/usr/src NOPORTS=YES MAKE_ISOS=YES however /usr/home/current is being ignored completely and everything ends up in

Re: make release

On 12/04/2011, at 17:02, George Kontostanos wrote: > I am trying to make a release with the following arguments: > > make release CHROOTDIR=/usr/home/current BUILDNAME=9-CURRENT > EXTSRCDIR=/usr/src NOPORTS=YES MAKE_ISOS=YES > > however /usr/home/current is being igno

make release

I am trying to make a release with the following arguments: make release CHROOTDIR=/usr/home/current BUILDNAME=9-CURRENT EXTSRCDIR=/usr/src NOPORTS=YES MAKE_ISOS=YES however /usr/home/current is being ignored completely and everything ends up in /usr/obj/usr/src. Am I doing something wrong

Re: make release problems (amd64)

nce. Try 'make obj' before 'make release' - that fixed it for me. Thanks for reporting this! I just modified src/release/Makefile so that 'make release' causes the obj target to be run first, so this shouldn't happen anymore. -Nathan

Re: make release problems (amd64)

On 26.03.2011 05:32, Daniel O'Connor wrote: Has anyone done one recently? I note there aren't any snapshots for this month, so perhaps I'm not alone. I tried this :- RELNAME=9.0 BUILDNAME=${RELNAME}-GENESIS make release CHROOTDIR=/tmp/${RELNAME}-release BUILDNAME=$BUILDNAME

Re: make release problems (amd64)

On 26/03/2011, at 18:42, O. Hartmann wrote: > Yes, I tried and I ran into the same problems. But I didn't run into problems > lately, the problem resists for me now for approx. three weeks or so and I > reported this in "questions@" once. Try 'make obj' bef

Re: make release problems (amd64)

On 26/03/2011, at 15:02, Daniel O'Connor wrote: usr/src/release/dist/usr/src/release/dist/usr/src/release/dist/usr/src/release/dist/usr/src/release/dist/usr/src/release/dist/usr/src/release/dist/usr/src/release/dist/usr/src/release/dist/usr/src/release/dist/usr/src/release/dist/usr/src/release/ker

make release problems (amd64)

Has anyone done one recently? I note there aren't any snapshots for this month, so perhaps I'm not alone. I tried this :- RELNAME=9.0 BUILDNAME=${RELNAME}-GENESIS make release CHROOTDIR=/tmp/${RELNAME}-release BUILDNAME=$BUILDNAME HTTP_PROXY=http://proxy:3128 FTP_PROXY=http://

Re: ports/150265: [patch] print/ghostscript8 disable bogus port conflicts in make release

ur fine mailing > lists might be good. > > Thanks! > [adding a mailing list per your suggestion] I think you are misunderstanding the issue here. This is not a ghostscript issue and the maintainer of ghostscript isn't the right person to look at it. The same issue can appear with other

Re: make release broken

On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 11:02 PM, James R. Van Artsdalen wrote: > On 5/22/2010 8:25 PM, Rob Farmer wrote: >> make release is still broken on amd64 as of svn 208373 (2010-05-21 >>> 04:52:49 -0500) >>> >>> That patch seems unrelated? >>> >> What n

Re: make release broken

On 5/22/2010 8:25 PM, Rob Farmer wrote: > make release is still broken on amd64 as of svn 208373 (2010-05-21 >> 04:52:49 -0500) >> >> That patch seems unrelated? >> > What needs done is > /src/release/$ARCH/boot_crunch.conf files need the relevant libraries >

Re: make release broken

On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 8:09 AM, James R. Van Artsdalen wrote: > On 5/18/2010 2:34 AM, jhell wrote: >> On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 10:35 PM, Rob Farmer >> wrote: >>>> make release is broken on current. Seems to be related to the lzma >>>> import. This is on i3

Re: make release broken

On 5/18/2010 2:34 AM, jhell wrote: > On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 10:35 PM, Rob Farmer > wrote: >>> make release is broken on current. Seems to be related to the lzma >>> import. This is on i386: >>> >>> cc -static -o boot_crunch boot_crunch.o hostname.lo pw

Re: make release broken

Rob Farmer wrote: > Hi, > > make release is broken on current. Seems to be related to the lzma > import. This is on i386: .. > : undefined reference to `lzma_end' > /usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/usr/lib/libarchive.a(archive_read_support_compression_xz.o)(.text+0x567): > I

Re: make release broken

On 5/18/2010 1:39 AM, Garrett Cooper wrote: > On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 10:35 PM, Rob Farmer wrote: >> Hi, >> >> make release is broken on current. Seems to be related to the lzma >> import. This is on i386: >> >> cc -static -o boot_crunch boot_crunch.o ho

Re: make release broken

On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 10:35 PM, Rob Farmer wrote: > Hi, > > make release is broken on current. Seems to be related to the lzma > import. This is on i386: > > cc -static -o boot_crunch boot_crunch.o hostname.lo pwd.lo rm.lo sh.lo > test.lo camcontrol.lo dhclient.lo fs

make release broken

Hi, make release is broken on current. Seems to be related to the lzma import. This is on i386: cc -static -o boot_crunch boot_crunch.o hostname.lo pwd.lo rm.lo sh.lo test.lo camcontrol.lo dhclient.lo fsck_ffs.lo ifconfig.lo mount_nfs.lo newfs.lo route.lo rtsol.lo tunefs.lo cpio.lo find.lo

Re: make release...

est re-reading my email. > root >> pwd > /home/fajri/data/usr/src/release > root >> patch < genesis-patch-ae > > root >> make release CHROOTDIR=/home/fajri/data/root BUILDNAME=FAJRI > CVSROOT=/home/fajri/data/usr RELEASETAG=RELENG_4_8_RELEASE > &g

Re: make release...

thanks alot for your reply... but, after patched my FreeBSD with your patch, i still get errors root >> pwd /home/fajri/data/usr/src/release root >> patch < genesis-patch-ae root >> make release CHROOTDIR=/home/fajri/data/root BUILDNAME=FAJRI CVSROOT

Re: make release...

> On Tue, Oct 21, 2003 at 04:51:22PM +0930, Daniel O'Connor wrote: > [...] >> Either apply the patch I attached and add CPNOTCVS= to your make >> release options, or check out the repository. >> > In HEAD, a similar functionality is already provided through the

Re: make release...

On Tue, Oct 21, 2003 at 04:51:22PM +0930, Daniel O'Connor wrote: [...] > Either apply the patch I attached and add CPNOTCVS= to your make release > options, or check out the repository. > In HEAD, a similar functionality is already provided through the use of the EXTSRCDIR v

Re: make release...

On Tuesday 21 October 2003 16:31, Anthony Fajri wrote: > fajri >> more stable-supfile|grep release > *default release=cvs tag=RELENG_4 You aren't syncing the repo with cvsup so the check out in make release doesn't work. Either apply the patch I attached and add CPNOTCVS

make release...

fajri >> more stable-supfile|grep release *default release=cvs tag=RELENG_4 == # make release CHROOTDIR=/home/fajri/data/root BUILDNAME=FAJRI CVSROOT=/home/fajri/data/usr RELEASETAG=RELENG_4 if [ -f /etc/resolv.conf ]; then cp -

make release and md(4) problem

Hi, when doing my first make release I noticed it stopped somewhere and hung :( 74830 p2 D+ 0:01.12 cpio -dump /mnt The host is i386 and TARGET ist sparc64 just to confuse. The base system runs a HEAD world/kernel from mid july. The above cpio must be from src/release/sparc64

Bug in make release regarding install.cfg

Folks, I've noted that the following inconsistency exists in make release. If there is a install.cfg file in /usr/src/release when executing make release (the file which if exists is placed into the root of mfs and customises behaviour of sysinstall), /usr/src/release/install.cfg

RE: fbsd 4.8 make release question ?

On 14-Aug-2003 NIkolay Kalev wrote: > How can the values for BIGBOOT image can be changed so if there is source > patch for the system like ssp make release won;t fail when buidling release.9 > stage ? Use a local patch via LOCAL_PATCHES. -- John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]

fbsd 4.8 make release question ?

How can the values for BIGBOOT image can be changed so if there is source patch for the system like ssp make release won;t fail when buidling release.9 stage ? ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd

Re: -current 'make release' status? [SOLVED]

On Tue, 29 Jul 2003, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 06:14:17AM +1000, Bruce Evans wrote: > > On Tue, 29 Jul 2003, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > > > > > ... > > > Forget what I've said about NO_WERROR, it (unfortunately) only > > > applies to the userland. > > > > > > Still, running "mak

Re: -current 'make release' status? [SOLVED]

In the last episode (Jul 29), Ruslan Ermilov said: > Hm, I always thought that -O2 and -Os are just useful aliases that in > effect only turn a few dozens of -f optimization flags, and that > switching some of them off later is allowed. I.e., "-Os > -fno-strict-aliasing" should work. That does wo

Re: -current 'make release' status? [SOLVED]

On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 06:14:17AM +1000, Bruce Evans wrote: > On Tue, 29 Jul 2003, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > > > ... > > Forget what I've said about NO_WERROR, it (unfortunately) only > > applies to the userland. > > > > Still, running "make rerelease KERNEL_FLAGS=WERROR=" gets the > > release done

Re: -current 'make release' status? [SOLVED]

On Tue, 29 Jul 2003, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > ... > Forget what I've said about NO_WERROR, it (unfortunately) only > applies to the userland. > > Still, running "make rerelease KERNEL_FLAGS=WERROR=" gets the > release done. > > I wondered why I get it, and similarly my nigthly "buildkernel" > compl

Re: -current 'make release' status? [SOLVED]

; > But then again: running "make rerelease" is effectively just > > calls the command above. I'm currently in the middle of the > > "make release" and will see if this is reproduceable. > > > > > # chroot /vol/vol0/work/5-current-chrootdir /bin/sh

Re: -current 'make release' status?

On Tue, Jul 29, 2003 at 06:30:54AM -0400, John wrote: > Hi, > >I'm currently down to this patch to allow a make release to complete > for -current: > [...] Try setting the KERNEL_FLAGS=-DNO_WERROR instead. >without it, the following causes BOOTMFS to abort: >

-current 'make release' status?

Hi, I'm currently down to this patch to allow a make release to complete for -current: === RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/release/Makefile,v retrieving revision 1.801 diff -u -r1.801 Makefile --- Makefile26 Jul 2003 06:47:40

Re: make release broken [FIX]

roke snapshot > > > building. Since I needed a working "make release" to go on with > > > my task on floppy-less "make release" (for AMD64, etc.), I had to > > > just fix it. Attached is the patch. It also fixes another issue > > > w

Re: make release broken [FIX]

On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 02:26:34PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: > > On 22-Jul-2003 Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > > Hi! > > > > As many of you probably know, recent telnet commit broke snapshot > > building. Since I needed a working "make release" to go on with

Re: make release broken [FIX]

On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 11:33:50AM +0100, Mark Murray wrote: > Hi > > Please do not commit this. > Please stop repeating this endlessly. This patch is only for those who need a working "make release" urgently, like me. You made it clear that you're working on a bett

Re: make release broken [FIX]

> Hi! > >=20 > > As many of you probably know, recent telnet commit broke snapshot > > building. Since I needed a working "make release" to go on with > > my task on floppy-less "make release" (for AMD64, etc.), I had to > > just fix it. Attach

Re: make release broken [FIX]

On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 07:42:33PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > Hi! > > As many of you probably know, recent telnet commit broke snapshot > building. Since I needed a working "make release" to go on with > my task on floppy-less "make release" (for A

Re: make release broken [FIX]

On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 03:07:01PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: > > >> Are you eliminating the mfsroot? > >> > > Yes. > > Ugh. > > How does sysinstall work with this change? You do realize that we > mount the MFS as /, then mount the disk under /mnt, chroot to /mnt, > then mount the CD in /dist

Re: make release broken [FIX]

On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 03:07:01PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: > > >> >> Why not simply enable 'NO_FLOPPIES' on the arch's that don't want > >> >> floppies? > >> >> > >> Are you eliminating the mfsroot? > >> > > Yes. > > Ugh. > Yes, after looking into this a bit deeper, I must agree that preser

Re: make release broken [FIX]

n Ermilov wrote: >> >> > Hi! >> >> > >> >> > As many of you probably know, recent telnet commit broke snapshot >> >> > building. Since I needed a working "make release" to go on with >> >> > my task on floppy-less &

Re: make release broken [FIX]

; >> > As many of you probably know, recent telnet commit broke snapshot > >> > building. Since I needed a working "make release" to go on with > >> > my task on floppy-less "make release" (for AMD64, etc.), I had to > >> > just fix it

Re: make release broken [FIX]

On 22-Jul-2003 Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 02:26:34PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: >> >> On 22-Jul-2003 Ruslan Ermilov wrote: >> > Hi! >> > >> > As many of you probably know, recent telnet commit broke snapshot >> > building

Re: make release broken [FIX]

On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 02:26:34PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: > > On 22-Jul-2003 Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > > Hi! > > > > As many of you probably know, recent telnet commit broke snapshot > > building. Since I needed a working "make release" to go on with

RE: make release broken [FIX]

On 22-Jul-2003 Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > Hi! > > As many of you probably know, recent telnet commit broke snapshot > building. Since I needed a working "make release" to go on with > my task on floppy-less "make release" (for AMD64, etc.), I had to > just fi

Re: make release broken [FIX]

/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Disposition: inline > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > Hi! > > As many of you probably know, recent telnet commit broke snapshot > building. Since I needed a working "make release" to go on with > my task on floppy-less

make release broken [FIX]

Hi! As many of you probably know, recent telnet commit broke snapshot building. Since I needed a working "make release" to go on with my task on floppy-less "make release" (for AMD64, etc.), I had to just fix it. Attached is the patch. It also fixes another issue with th

Re: make release of CURRENT on 4.7 broken again ?

On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 06:08:43PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 02:13:45PM +0300, Andrey Elperin wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 20, 2003 at 02:44:23PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > > > > A few days ago I've noticed such messages in CURRENT buildlog (on 4.7 > > > > box, building

Re: make release of CURRENT on 4.7 broken again ?

On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 02:13:45PM +0300, Andrey Elperin wrote: > On Sun, Jul 20, 2003 at 02:44:23PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > > > A few days ago I've noticed such messages in CURRENT buildlog (on 4.7 > > > box, building without -j) : > > > > > > cc -Os -pipe -c chown_stub.c > > > ld -dc -r

Re: make release of CURRENT on 4.7 broken again ?

On Sun, Jul 20, 2003 at 02:44:23PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > > A few days ago I've noticed such messages in CURRENT buildlog (on 4.7 > > box, building without -j) : > > > > cc -Os -pipe -c chown_stub.c > > ld -dc -r -o chown.lo chown_stub.o /usr/obj//usr/src/usr.sbin/chown/chown.o > > crunc

Re: make release of CURRENT on 4.7 broken again ?

On Sun, Jul 20, 2003 at 02:04:28PM +0300, Andrey Elperin wrote: > > Hi, > > A few days ago I've noticed such messages in CURRENT buildlog (on 4.7 > box, building without -j) : > > cc -Os -pipe -c chown_stub.c > ld -dc -r -o chown.lo chown_stub.o /usr/obj//usr/src/usr.sbin/chown/chown.o > crun

make release of CURRENT on 4.7 broken again ?

Hi, A few days ago I've noticed such messages in CURRENT buildlog (on 4.7 box, building without -j) : cc -Os -pipe -c chown_stub.c ld -dc -r -o chown.lo chown_stub.o /usr/obj//usr/src/usr.sbin/chown/chown.o crunchide -k _crunched_chown_stub chown.lo echo "int _crunched_chroot_stub(int argc, c

Re: i386 'make release' broken

On Sun, Jul 20, 2003 at 02:18:42AM -0600, Scott Long wrote: > Just got the following from a 'make release BUILDNAME=5.1-CURRENT > CHROOTDIR=/usr/release CVSROOT=/usr/ncvs NOPORTS= NODOC= ". My > world was up to date to within a day. The full log is at > http://people.freeb

i386 'make release' broken

Just got the following from a 'make release BUILDNAME=5.1-CURRENT CHROOTDIR=/usr/release CVSROOT=/usr/ncvs NOPORTS= NODOC= ". My world was up to date to within a day. The full log is at http://people.freebsd.org/~scottl/current-release-i386.log.gz. Note that while this is an SMP m

  1   2   3   4   5   >