Re: m68k: being ignored for testing propagation
Wouter Verhelst <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> In the case of the recent ICE problems, I recently went through the list
> of packages that failed to build by producing an ICE and requeued those
> that would most likely succeed now; so if a package is not built yet,
> you may want to check what the wanna-build state is.
I use igloo's package status page for this.
> In this particular case, I did not requeue the package because I didn't
> think it would've been fixed; however, if you can confirm it has, then
> that's great and it should be built.
When it failed before, I tried to reproduce the failure. Then I took
the file where it failed, ran gcc -E with the same arguments as the
build, and generated a preprocessor-free .c file. Compiling that file
with gcc -c generated the same error. Compiling this same file with
gcc -c now no longer generates that error. This suggests that it may
run to completion now, but it is, of course, not a "confirmation".
Anyway, I would request that it be requeued on this basis.
Unfortunately, I never reported a bug with this file because I did
this test days before I moved and couldn't retrieve the file from
crest for an extended period of time. Sorry about that.
> As to the question of whether you should interrupt the build, I think
> it's most important to see how much CPU time you'd be throwing away. If
> crest is heavily loaded, and you're not far into the build yet, it's
> probably a good idea to stop it. If, however, the build is more than
> (say) two-thirds into completion, I'd rather you just let it continue;
> it'd be a waste to throw them away, then.
The build was probably 5% done, so I interrupted it. I'll delete the
files on crest once I see that the wanna-build state has been
Jay Berkenbilt <email@example.com>