Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2024 11:20:13 -0700 From: Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com> To: FreeBSD-STABLE Mailing List <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD ARM List <freebsd-arm@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Official stable/14 builds of armv6 have been broken for over a month ( Tier 3 for stable/14 ) Message-ID: <5CA28D98-4C9F-43DC-9398-EF1A357E0A67@yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <6186453F-EA2D-4861-B9D2-542BCB659C5D@yahoo.com> References: <6186453F-EA2D-4861-B9D2-542BCB659C5D@yahoo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Oct 20, 2024, at 10:41, Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com> wrote: > The build just after the last successful one for stable/14 armv6 looks = to be: >=20 >=20 > https://ci.freebsd.org/job/FreeBSD-stable-14-armv6-build/1008/ >=20 > #1008 (Mon Sep 09 21:44:50 GMT 2024) > 755e773877e9f3abab3bed2d46d9d87978e303d9 >=20 >=20 > https://ci.freebsd.org/job/FreeBSD-stable-14-armv6-build/1008/console >=20 > 15:32:05 ld: error: undefined reference due to = --no-allow-shlib-undefined: zfs_sha256_block_armv7 > 15:32:05 >>> referenced by = /usr/obj/usr/src/arm.armv6/tmp/usr/lib/libicp.so > 15:32:05=20 > 15:32:05 ld: error: undefined reference due to = --no-allow-shlib-undefined: zfs_sha512_block_armv7 > 15:32:05 >>> referenced by = /usr/obj/usr/src/arm.armv6/tmp/usr/lib/libicp.so >=20 >=20 > But builds from today show the same type of error: >=20 >=20 > https://ci.freebsd.org/job/FreeBSD-stable-14-armv6-build/1206/ >=20 > #1206 (Sun Oct 20 15:18:03 GMT 2024) > edbeda6b759459a9c2c5e8e12b18294d41959270 >=20 >=20 > https://ci.freebsd.org/job/FreeBSD-stable-14-armv6-build/1206/console >=20 > 08:53:28 ld: error: undefined reference due to = --no-allow-shlib-undefined: zfs_sha256_block_armv7 > 08:53:28 >>> referenced by = /usr/obj/usr/src/arm.armv6/tmp/usr/lib/libicp.so > 08:53:28=20 > 08:53:28 ld: error: undefined reference due to = --no-allow-shlib-undefined: zfs_sha512_block_armv7 > 08:53:28 >>> referenced by = /usr/obj/usr/src/arm.armv6/tmp/usr/lib/libicp.so >=20 >=20 > So around 1.3 months without a successful build. It would seem > one of the following would be better than wasting machine > resources on failing, long-running qemu based builds . . . Ignore my mistaken reference to qemu being involved. It still took around 9hrs in one case or 15.5 hrs in the other case for the above 2 examples to fail. How many build attempts were there over the 10.3 months or so? > ) stop trying to have stable/14 armv6 builds > or: > ) get the stable/14 armv6 builds working again >=20 >=20 > Note: I do not use armv6 builds. I just happened to notice this > when I was looking at https://ci.freebsd.org/tinderbox/ for > other reasons. =3D=3D=3D Mark Millard marklmi at yahoo.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5CA28D98-4C9F-43DC-9398-EF1A357E0A67>