[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: buildd failures for amd64?

Joost Witteveen <joost@iliana.nl> writes:

> Je 2006/07/20(4)/13:07, Goswin von Brederlow skribis:
>> checking for ICMP ping syntax... Terminated
>> make: *** [config.status] Error 1
>> Build killed with signal 15 after 150 minutes of inactivity
> Yes, I've seen it in the webpage. But it doesn't appear when I run
>   fakeroot debian/rules binary
> manually. So either something strange is going on on the buildd amd64 machine,
> or the package has an unreproducing bug.

Same here. I tried to see what is wrong but heisenbugs are hard to
trace. :(

>> In the past we had a few packages just hang in sbuild during build for
>> no concernable reasons. This might be a new one with the same
>> effect.
> Yes. Although most packages are available for amd64, whenever I noticed
> an unavailable package, I could manually build it without any changes.
> So maybe it would be useful to send a STOP instead of TERM signal to the
> process (and an email to the owner), go on with the next package, and 
> let the owner of the machine find out later what went wrong with the 
> build (connecting to the stopped process with gdb and friends).
> (with a max number of STOPped builds of cource)

The buildd chroot gets cleaned after each build so you couldn't resume
the build. The processes would then just hang around and waste
valueable ram that on some buildds is in short supply. Remember that a
gcc or g++ can easily eat 512MB ram and that just adds up awfully fast.

>> To run a buildd you would also need to be a DD.
> Well, I still get my joostje@debian.org email:). Maybe I still am a DD?

Becoming one could be quite simple. Depends on how long ago you quit
and how. Is you gpg key still in the keyring? If so then you are a DD

If you are a DD you could upload packages that you build localy. But
that is deprecated unless there is a solid reason why the buildd can't
build the package.
I pointed the bug out to the buildd admin on irc in case he missed it
here. It will probably be looked at tonight time permitting.

>> But you can do what you do now.
> OK, that's what I'll do then.


Reply to: