Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 28 Feb 2011 10:42:40 +0100
From:      Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net>
To:        Emanuel Haupt <ehaupt@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        emulation@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: MASTER_SITE quality of emulation@, freebsd-emulation@ ports
Message-ID:  <20110228104240.32245ke5o34pco40@webmail.leidinger.net>
In-Reply-To: <20110228101541.1926b275.ehaupt@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <20110226125814.3b0a46e5.ehaupt@FreeBSD.org> <20110227145125.12961olps6d8bapw@webmail.leidinger.net> <20110228101541.1926b275.ehaupt@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Quoting Emanuel Haupt <ehaupt@FreeBSD.org> (from Mon, 28 Feb 2011  
10:15:41 +0100):

> Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@leidinger.net> wrote:
>> Quoting Emanuel Haupt <ehaupt@FreeBSD.org> (from Sat, 26 Feb 2011
>> 12:58:14 +0100):
>>
>> > The distilator [1] shows that roughly 97% by a total of109969 all
>> > referenced distfiles fail to download. Resulting in countless
>> > timeouts.
>> >
>> > Excerpt from the most recent run:
>> >
>> > Maintainer                      ok      bad     % bad
>> > emulation@FreeBSD.org           1005    45696   97.85%
>> > freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org   1691    61577   97.33%
>>
>> > Ideas?
>>
>> Would it help to change the order of the master site list? I assume
>> that there are some which have everything.
>
> Unfortunately that wouldn't be much help to people who use MASTER_SORT.

Yes.

> I believe the best way would be to cleanup Mk/bsd.sites.mk. In
> particular MASTER_SITE_FEDORA_LINUX.

I plan to have a look at a more recent linux distribution for our  
linux_base. If I get the time, and if it will be fedora based  
(probably it will, as it may make the update a little bit more easy),  
this may mean the list will go back to what it was...

> ports-mgmt/distilator can help identifying those sites. For instance:
>
> $ distilator /usr/ports/emulators/linux_base-f10/
>
> Result:
> http://people.freebsd.org/~ehaupt/misc/linux_base-f10-distilator.log.gz
>
> A quick check would suggests to only keep:
> $ zcat linux_base-f10-distilator.log.gz  | grep ^200 | awk '{print $3}' \
> 	| perl -e 'use URI; while(<>) { chomp(); $u=URI->new($_); print  
> $u->host . "\n"; }' \
> 	| sort | uniq
>
> archives.fedoraproject.org
> ftp.quicknet.nl
> ftp.rhd.ru
> ftp.udl.es
> mirror.steadfast.net
>
> ...but reducing MASTER_SITE_FEDORA_LINUX to those hosts shows that  
> not even those
> mirrors are consistent. Hence my prior suggestion to get a complete

:(

> set of all distfiles
> needed by ports using MASTER_SITE_FEDORA_LINUX and mirror those on  
> reliable mirrors.

Should be easy to do (if a mirror is available).

> I can assume that task if that's fine with emulation@ :-)

I am fine with this. I try to deprecate the linux*f[6789]* ports this  
week (I have to make up my mind if it will be one or two months of  
grace time). If you just spend the time to have a look at the fc4 and  
f10 ones, everything should arrive at a sane situation after the  
expiration date.

Bye,
Alexander.

-- 
Hindsight is an exact science.

http://www.Leidinger.net    Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7
http://www.FreeBSD.org       netchild @ FreeBSD.org  : PGP ID = 72077137



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110228104240.32245ke5o34pco40>