On 2/7/14, 2:18 AM, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 01:36:45PM +0100, Chris Rees wrote:
It appears that really weird SRCBASE assumptions are made throughout the
code. I'll have to put a temporary hack in to just make SRCBASE appear
inside the chroot whatever it's set to.
On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 01:36:45PM +0100, Chris Rees wrote:
It appears that really weird SRCBASE assumptions are made throughout the
code. I'll have to put a temporary hack in to just make SRCBASE appear
inside the chroot whatever it's set to. Setting and unsetting SRCBASE just
breaks
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 03:37:31PM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
I have some more here: if plist is broken for one of the dependent ports
(not sure if it happens for staged ports only or not), remaining ports also
fail to build with two-line logs:
building foobar-1.42 in directory
On 10/20/13, 10:51 AM, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 01:36:45PM +0100, Chris Rees wrote:
It appears that really weird SRCBASE assumptions are made throughout the
code. I'll have to put a temporary hack in to just make SRCBASE appear
inside the chroot whatever it's set to.
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 04:33:48PM -0400, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
The distcache directory is created within the build each time before the
cache is mounted. So this becomes a mountpoint. Does your _host_
distcache directory have 0775 perms? If so, I imagine the perms should
be inherited
On 10/27/13, 9:06 PM, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 04:33:48PM -0400, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
The distcache directory is created within the build each time before the
cache is mounted. So this becomes a mountpoint. Does your _host_
distcache directory have 0775 perms? If
On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 07:05:20PM +0100, Chris Rees wrote:
On 2013-10-20 15:51, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
However I've noticed another regression: doing chmod g+w
/usr/ports/distfiles in the middle of the tinder run totally confuses
it: all build attempts after chmod fail with identical tiny
On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 01:36:45PM +0100, Chris Rees wrote:
It appears that really weird SRCBASE assumptions are made throughout the
code. I'll have to put a temporary hack in to just make SRCBASE appear
inside the chroot whatever it's set to. Setting and unsetting SRCBASE
just breaks
On 2013-10-20 15:51, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 01:36:45PM +0100, Chris Rees wrote:
It appears that really weird SRCBASE assumptions are made throughout
the
code. I'll have to put a temporary hack in to just make SRCBASE
appear
inside the chroot whatever it's set to.
On 12 Oct 2013, at 12:49, Chris Rees wrote:
[cross posted to tinderbox-list]
On 2013-10-09 22:27, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 09:11:10PM +0100, Chris Rees wrote:
Alexey, if you're interested, the patch hitting CVS is at:
On 10/13/13 8:36 AM, Chris Rees wrote:
On 12 Oct 2013, at 12:49, Chris Rees wrote:
[cross posted to tinderbox-list]
On 2013-10-09 22:27, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 09:11:10PM +0100, Chris Rees wrote:
Alexey, if you're interested, the patch hitting CVS is at:
[cross posted to tinderbox-list]
On 2013-10-09 22:27, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 09:11:10PM +0100, Chris Rees wrote:
Alexey, if you're interested, the patch hitting CVS is at:
http://www.bayofrum.net/~crees/patches/tinderbox-calculate-deps-in-chroot-9.diff
Ah, it seems
On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 06:09:55PM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
Hi there,
I've started to observe the following error when trying to tinderbuild
(freshly cvs up'ed from marcuscom.com) a port for -b 8.4:
...
add_pkg pkg-1.1.4_7.tbz
adding dependencies
pkg_add pkg-1.1.4_7.tbz
On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 05:59:50PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 06:09:55PM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
Why does it happen? I was under impression that 8.x will never switch to
pkgng. Am I doing something wrong, or need to configure my tindy somehow?
1/ yes
On 2013-10-09 19:59, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 05:59:50PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 06:09:55PM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
Why does it happen? I was under impression that 8.x will never switch to
pkgng. Am I doing something wrong, or
Am 09.10.2013 13:10 schrieb Alexey Dokuchaev da...@nsu.ru:
Hi there,
I've started to observe the following error when trying to tinderbuild
(freshly cvs up'ed from marcuscom.com) a port for -b 8.4:
...
add_pkg pkg-1.1.4_7.tbz
adding dependencies
pkg_add pkg-1.1.4_7.tbz
The
...@freebsd.org, Chris Rees
cr...@bayofrum.net
Sent: Wed, 09 Oct 2013 20:52
Subject: Re: 10.0-hosted tinderbox: 8.4 builds broken?
Am 09.10.2013 13:10 schrieb Alexey Dokuchaev da...@nsu.ru:
Hi there,
I've started to observe the following error when trying to tinderbuild
(freshly cvs up'ed from
On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 09:11:10PM +0100, Chris Rees wrote:
That's really annoying... I'll have to track it down Friday I'm afraid.
cvs up'ing back to sources as of Oct 6 (before your recent commits) seems
to restore correct behavior for me. Now -b 8.4 builds do not try to find
or install
18 matches
Mail list logo
