Re: rsync not being kept up to date?
On Nov 4, 2016, at 9:39AM, Adam Mercer wrote: > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 11:14 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: > >> What does this port contain? Does it download 2GB of data and repackage it? >> Does it generate 2GB of data? > > It contains the output of numerical relativity simulations that > routines in the lalsimualtion port read in and scale for different > parameters. We're investigating other ways to distribute this data as > when it was 10s of Mbs it wasn't that much of a problem, but now it > is. Trust a relativistic port to increase in mass as computers increase in speed... :-) -Sterling ___ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
Re: rsync not being kept up to date?
On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 11:14 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: > What does this port contain? Does it download 2GB of data and repackage it? > Does it generate 2GB of data? It contains the output of numerical relativity simulations that routines in the lalsimualtion port read in and scale for different parameters. We're investigating other ways to distribute this data as when it was 10s of Mbs it wasn't that much of a problem, but now it is. Cheers Adam ___ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
Re: rsync not being kept up to date?
On 2016-11-5 03:14 , Ryan Schmidt wrote: On Nov 4, 2016, at 08:03, Adam Mercer wrote: Or is there a way to tell the buildbot not to produce packages? Whether the buildbot distributes the binary is based on whether its stated license is distributable or not. But I'm reluctant to suggest you change the license to something not distributable if it is. Instead of replacing the license string, you could append some human-readable string that indicates that we don't want to upload binaries. As long as it's not in the list of recognised licenses it will have that effect. - Josh ___ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
Re: rsync not being kept up to date?
> On Nov 4, 2016, at 08:03, Adam Mercer wrote: > >> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 11:40 PM, Ryan Schmidt >> wrote: >> >> It's currently busy uploading binaries for lalsuite-extra @1.2.0 -- they're >> 2GB apiece. This might take another day to finish. > > I was worried about that, in fact that package has caused a few > problems at work and we're investigating how best to deal with it as > I've been told that it's only going to keep getting bigger as time > goes on. > > Would you prefer it if I removed that port? Not if you need it. > Or is there a way to tell > the buildbot not to produce packages? Whether the buildbot distributes the binary is based on whether its stated license is distributable or not. But I'm reluctant to suggest you change the license to something not distributable if it is. What does this port contain? Does it download 2GB of data and repackage it? Does it generate 2GB of data? ___ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
Re: rsync not being kept up to date?
On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 11:40 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: > It's currently busy uploading binaries for lalsuite-extra @1.2.0 -- they're > 2GB apiece. This might take another day to finish. I was worried about that, in fact that package has caused a few problems at work and we're investigating how best to deal with it as I've been told that it's only going to keep getting bigger as time goes on. Would you prefer it if I removed that port? Or is there a way to tell the buildbot not to produce packages? Cheers Adam ___ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
Re: rsync not being kept up to date?
> On Nov 3, 2016, at 11:03 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: > >> >> On Nov 3, 2016, at 11:02 PM, Joshua Root wrote: >> >> On 2016-11-4 14:53 , Blair Zajac wrote: >>> On Nov 3, 2016, at 8:51 PM, Joshua Root wrote: On 2016-11-4 14:41 , Blair Zajac wrote: > Seeing some odd things with rsync with this config: > > root@poppy-mbp:~# grep -v ^# /opt/local/etc/macports/sources.conf | uniq > > rsync://rsync.macports.org/release/ports/ [default] > > > > root@poppy-mbp:~# port -v outdated > The following installed ports are outdated: > curl-ca-bundle 7.50.3_0 < 7.50.3_1 > mercurial 3.9.2_0 < 4.0_0 > root@poppy-mbp:~# port -v upgrade --enforce-variants outdated > ---> Scanning binaries for linking errors > ---> No broken files found. > root@poppy-mbp:~# > > > It doesn’t look like the files on rsync.macports.org are being kept up to > date. Did I miss a command to run on my MacPort installs? Ryan mentioned earlier that his internet connection was being saturated by package uploads, which delays the update of the ports tree and index. But in this case you do see the new version, so that can't be what happened. Did you activate the older version of these ports after upgrading previously? If not, does 'port info mercurial' agree with 'port info --index mercurial’? >>> >>> No, I didn’t activate the old versions of the ports. The two commands don’t >>> match: >>> >>> $ port info mercurial | head -2 >>> mercurial @3.9.2 (devel, python) >>> Sub-ports:mercurial-devel >>> >>> >>> $ port info --index mercurial | head -2 >>> mercurial @4.0 (devel, python) >>> Sub-ports:mercurial-devel >> >> OK, so the Portfiles are up to date but not the PortIndex. Not sure why that >> would be happening; I guess Ryan needs to take a look. > > The other way around. Looking at the FAU rsync server, the PortIndex was > updated today, but the mercurial Portfile has not been updated since all > Portfiles were updated on October 30 when we switched to Git. I don't yet > know why. It's currently busy uploading binaries for lalsuite-extra @1.2.0 -- they're 2GB apiece. This might take another day to finish. https://packages.macports.org/lalsuite-extra/ ___ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
Re: rsync not being kept up to date?
On 2016-11-4 15:02 , Joshua Root wrote: On 2016-11-4 14:53 , Blair Zajac wrote: $ port info mercurial | head -2 mercurial @3.9.2 (devel, python) Sub-ports:mercurial-devel $ port info --index mercurial | head -2 mercurial @4.0 (devel, python) Sub-ports:mercurial-devel OK, so the Portfiles are up to date but not the PortIndex. Not sure why that would be happening; I guess Ryan needs to take a look. No, wait, other way round. That's even stranger. :-| Could be the non-tarball ports tree is not updating properly. Try changing to the tarball? That's a good idea anyway as it's signed. - Josh ___ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
Re: rsync not being kept up to date?
> On Nov 3, 2016, at 11:02 PM, Joshua Root wrote: > > On 2016-11-4 14:53 , Blair Zajac wrote: >> >>> On Nov 3, 2016, at 8:51 PM, Joshua Root wrote: >>> >>> On 2016-11-4 14:41 , Blair Zajac wrote: Seeing some odd things with rsync with this config: root@poppy-mbp:~# grep -v ^# /opt/local/etc/macports/sources.conf | uniq rsync://rsync.macports.org/release/ports/ [default] root@poppy-mbp:~# port -v outdated The following installed ports are outdated: curl-ca-bundle 7.50.3_0 < 7.50.3_1 mercurial 3.9.2_0 < 4.0_0 root@poppy-mbp:~# port -v upgrade --enforce-variants outdated ---> Scanning binaries for linking errors ---> No broken files found. root@poppy-mbp:~# It doesn’t look like the files on rsync.macports.org are being kept up to date. Did I miss a command to run on my MacPort installs? >>> >>> Ryan mentioned earlier that his internet connection was being saturated by >>> package uploads, which delays the update of the ports tree and index. >>> >>> But in this case you do see the new version, so that can't be what >>> happened. Did you activate the older version of these ports after upgrading >>> previously? If not, does 'port info mercurial' agree with 'port info >>> --index mercurial’? >> >> No, I didn’t activate the old versions of the ports. The two commands don’t >> match: >> >> $ port info mercurial | head -2 >> mercurial @3.9.2 (devel, python) >> Sub-ports:mercurial-devel >> >> >> $ port info --index mercurial | head -2 >> mercurial @4.0 (devel, python) >> Sub-ports:mercurial-devel > > OK, so the Portfiles are up to date but not the PortIndex. Not sure why that > would be happening; I guess Ryan needs to take a look. The other way around. Looking at the FAU rsync server, the PortIndex was updated today, but the mercurial Portfile has not been updated since all Portfiles were updated on October 30 when we switched to Git. I don't yet know why. ___ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
Re: rsync not being kept up to date?
On 2016-11-4 14:53 , Blair Zajac wrote: On Nov 3, 2016, at 8:51 PM, Joshua Root wrote: On 2016-11-4 14:41 , Blair Zajac wrote: Seeing some odd things with rsync with this config: root@poppy-mbp:~# grep -v ^# /opt/local/etc/macports/sources.conf | uniq rsync://rsync.macports.org/release/ports/ [default] root@poppy-mbp:~# port -v outdated The following installed ports are outdated: curl-ca-bundle 7.50.3_0 < 7.50.3_1 mercurial 3.9.2_0 < 4.0_0 root@poppy-mbp:~# port -v upgrade --enforce-variants outdated ---> Scanning binaries for linking errors ---> No broken files found. root@poppy-mbp:~# It doesn’t look like the files on rsync.macports.org are being kept up to date. Did I miss a command to run on my MacPort installs? Ryan mentioned earlier that his internet connection was being saturated by package uploads, which delays the update of the ports tree and index. But in this case you do see the new version, so that can't be what happened. Did you activate the older version of these ports after upgrading previously? If not, does 'port info mercurial' agree with 'port info --index mercurial’? No, I didn’t activate the old versions of the ports. The two commands don’t match: $ port info mercurial | head -2 mercurial @3.9.2 (devel, python) Sub-ports:mercurial-devel $ port info --index mercurial | head -2 mercurial @4.0 (devel, python) Sub-ports:mercurial-devel OK, so the Portfiles are up to date but not the PortIndex. Not sure why that would be happening; I guess Ryan needs to take a look. To work around you can probably run portindex. - Josh ___ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
Re: rsync not being kept up to date?
> On Nov 3, 2016, at 8:51 PM, Joshua Root wrote: > > On 2016-11-4 14:41 , Blair Zajac wrote: >> Seeing some odd things with rsync with this config: >> >> root@poppy-mbp:~# grep -v ^# /opt/local/etc/macports/sources.conf | uniq >> >> rsync://rsync.macports.org/release/ports/ [default] >> >> >> >> root@poppy-mbp:~# port -v outdated >> The following installed ports are outdated: >> curl-ca-bundle 7.50.3_0 < 7.50.3_1 >> mercurial 3.9.2_0 < 4.0_0 >> root@poppy-mbp:~# port -v upgrade --enforce-variants outdated >> ---> Scanning binaries for linking errors >> ---> No broken files found. >> root@poppy-mbp:~# >> >> >> It doesn’t look like the files on rsync.macports.org are being kept up to >> date. Did I miss a command to run on my MacPort installs? > > Ryan mentioned earlier that his internet connection was being saturated by > package uploads, which delays the update of the ports tree and index. > > But in this case you do see the new version, so that can't be what happened. > Did you activate the older version of these ports after upgrading previously? > If not, does 'port info mercurial' agree with 'port info --index mercurial’? No, I didn’t activate the old versions of the ports. The two commands don’t match: $ port info mercurial | head -2 mercurial @3.9.2 (devel, python) Sub-ports:mercurial-devel $ port info --index mercurial | head -2 mercurial @4.0 (devel, python) Sub-ports:mercurial-devel Blair ___ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
Re: rsync not being kept up to date?
On 2016-11-4 14:41 , Blair Zajac wrote: Seeing some odd things with rsync with this config: root@poppy-mbp:~# grep -v ^# /opt/local/etc/macports/sources.conf | uniq rsync://rsync.macports.org/release/ports/ [default] root@poppy-mbp:~# port -v outdated The following installed ports are outdated: curl-ca-bundle 7.50.3_0 < 7.50.3_1 mercurial 3.9.2_0 < 4.0_0 root@poppy-mbp:~# port -v upgrade --enforce-variants outdated ---> Scanning binaries for linking errors ---> No broken files found. root@poppy-mbp:~# It doesn’t look like the files on rsync.macports.org are being kept up to date. Did I miss a command to run on my MacPort installs? Ryan mentioned earlier that his internet connection was being saturated by package uploads, which delays the update of the ports tree and index. But in this case you do see the new version, so that can't be what happened. Did you activate the older version of these ports after upgrading previously? If not, does 'port info mercurial' agree with 'port info --index mercurial'? - Josh ___ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
rsync not being kept up to date?
Seeing some odd things with rsync with this config: root@poppy-mbp:~# grep -v ^# /opt/local/etc/macports/sources.conf | uniq rsync://rsync.macports.org/release/ports/ [default] root@poppy-mbp:~# port -v outdated The following installed ports are outdated: curl-ca-bundle 7.50.3_0 < 7.50.3_1 mercurial 3.9.2_0 < 4.0_0 root@poppy-mbp:~# port -v upgrade --enforce-variants outdated ---> Scanning binaries for linking errors ---> No broken files found. root@poppy-mbp:~# It doesn’t look like the files on rsync.macports.org are being kept up to date. Did I miss a command to run on my MacPort installs? Blair ___ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
