From owner-svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Tue Oct 4 14:22:32 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-head@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 630E3AF4750; Tue, 4 Oct 2016 14:22:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd.contact@marino.st) Received: from shepard.synsport.net (mail.synsport.com [208.69.230.148]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B32B138; Tue, 4 Oct 2016 14:22:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd.contact@marino.st) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ip72-204-34-204.fv.ks.cox.net [72.204.34.204]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by shepard.synsport.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id F214E43C1A; Tue, 4 Oct 2016 09:22:13 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: svn commit: r422981 - in head/dns: bind9-devel bind910 bind911 bind99 To: Mathieu Arnold , marino@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org References: <201609301244.u8UCiSSh043206@repo.freebsd.org> <383dbd77-15a0-ea2b-e909-e24d849e80f7@marino.st> <6a63b844-f762-c885-0dfd-21ff327abce8@marino.st> Reply-To: marino@freebsd.org From: John Marino Message-ID: Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2016 09:22:28 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 161004-0, 10/04/2016), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-BeenThere: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree for head List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2016 14:22:32 -0000 On 10/4/2016 09:18, Mathieu Arnold wrote: > Le 04/10/2016 à 16:16, John Marino a écrit : >> On 10/4/2016 09:13, Mathieu Arnold wrote: >>> Le 04/10/2016 à 16:04, John Marino a écrit : >>>> We build under a very heavy load which flushes out marginally unsafe >>>> ports. >>> >>> Ok, so make(1) from dragonfly has the same bug make(1) from FreeBSD 9 >>> has, feel free to fix it in dragonfly's port tree. >> >> master has bmake 20160818 on it (for last 5 weeks) >> Release 4.6 has bmake 20141111. >> Do you know if make bug only applies to master? > > I have no idea. I was told the problem was with make(1) on FreeBSD 9, > which seemed to be right, as it does not fail at all on FreeBSD 10/11 > with -j 2-10. The -j number is not the only factor here. I've seen ports pass under very high -j numbers but start failing when the server gets loaded. DragonFly has the lastest bmake, modern binutils, modern gcc and it doesn't have fmake (what freebsd 9 uses). Why is it so critical to classify bind910 as jobs safe when there clearly is a question about it? Let's not immediately assume DF is at fault here. As I mentioned before, it could easily be the build tests you're doing aren't sufficient to flush this out. It *was* marked UNSAFE before, obviously with good reason. (albeit undocumented) John --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus