From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 6 16:57:25 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE0746A7; Sat, 6 Dec 2014 16:57:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mho-01-ewr.mailhop.org (mho-03-ewr.mailhop.org [204.13.248.66]) (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 B0F51863; Sat, 6 Dec 2014 16:57:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [73.34.117.227] (helo=ilsoft.org) by mho-01-ewr.mailhop.org with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1XxIfU-000FfB-Ko; Sat, 06 Dec 2014 16:57:16 +0000 Received: from [172.22.42.240] (revolution.hippie.lan [172.22.42.240]) by ilsoft.org (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id sB6GvF8l015985; Sat, 6 Dec 2014 09:57:15 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from ian@FreeBSD.org) X-Mail-Handler: Dyn Standard SMTP by Dyn X-Originating-IP: 73.34.117.227 X-Report-Abuse-To: abuse@dyndns.com (see http://www.dyndns.com/services/sendlabs/outbound_abuse.html for abuse reporting information) X-MHO-User: U2FsdGVkX1/WF0yNIS5HRei4vORK7k8x X-Authentication-Warning: paranoia.hippie.lan: Host revolution.hippie.lan [172.22.42.240] claimed to be [172.22.42.240] Subject: Re: Build failed in Jenkins: Build-UFS-image #599 From: Ian Lepore To: Dimitry Andric In-Reply-To: <7A7677F9-AD1B-436C-9A49-054F7CD6BBC4@FreeBSD.org> References: <1052304530.8.1417827164793.JavaMail.jenkins@jenkins-9.freebsd.org> <7A7677F9-AD1B-436C-9A49-054F7CD6BBC4@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-13" Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2014 09:57:14 -0700 Message-ID: <1417885034.1064.83.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.1 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by ilsoft.org id sB6GvF8l015985 Cc: FreeBSD CURRENT , Garrett Cooper X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2014 16:57:25 -0000 On Sat, 2014-12-06 at 16:01 +0100, Dimitry Andric wrote: > [trimmed CC list to -current] >=20 > On 06 Dec 2014, at 04:59, Garrett Cooper wrote: > > On Dec 5, 2014, at 16:52, jenkins-admin@freebsd.org wrote: > >=20 > >> See > >=20 > > I=FFm not entirely sure why the "could not determine COMPILER_TYPE" = error popped up, but I have a couple of questions/concerns related to the= makefile snippet. > > 1. Does it make sense to check CC when running make install? >=20 > Yes, of course it makes sense, if parts of the install depend on e.g. > COMPILER_TYPE. In some cases, you will have to run ${CC} to determine > what it is, specifically if it is just "cc". >=20 >=20 > > 2. Why isn=FFt this value determined once in Makefile.inc1 (per buil= d phase), then passed down from there >=20 > Because you are supposed to be able to build stuff in a subdirectory, > without invoking the full top-level Makefile infrastructure. The actua= l > infrastructure is in share/mk/bsd.*.mk, in fact. >=20 >=20 > > (I=FFve already considered the scenario where someone explicitly sets= CC in a non-toplevel Makefile, which is a problem, but an outlier rather= than the norm)? AFAICT, it gets recomputed for every recursive make, whi= ch contributes to useless forking for something that honestly doesn=FFt c= hange all that often/at all. >=20 > This is indeed a pity, and if you know a better solution, let's hear it= , > please. :-) >=20 >=20 > > At EMC/Isilon at least, we set CC/CXX=3Dfalse when running make dist= ribute*/installkernel/installworld to catch logic errors with rebuilding = code. Should this be in FreeBSD? >=20 > Not sure what that is meant to achieve. If parts of the installation > depend on the value of CC, why would you want to set it to false? Just > so it can error out at those points? >=20 > -Dimitry >=20 I suspect it's to prevent building during the install phase, because doing so is astonishing. I was astonished the other day when it happened. I would be much happier if it had just errored out. -- Ian