Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 18:45:17 +0200 From: Alexey Zelkin <phantom@FreeBSD.org> To: Dan Langille <dan@langille.org> Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/java/jdk14 looping on install? Message-ID: <20040209164517.GC23768@phantom.cris.net> In-Reply-To: <40273DAD.14286.14410189@localhost> References: <40264324.19153.106E4782@localhost> <40273DAD.14286.14410189@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
hi, On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 07:58:37AM -0500, Dan Langille wrote: > On 9 Feb 2004 at 0:20, Alexey Zelkin wrote: > > > On Sun, Feb 08, 2004 at 02:09:40PM -0500, Dan Langille wrote: > > > On 8 Feb 2004 at 18:23, Alexey Zelkin wrote: > > > > > > > hi, > > > > > > > > is linuxprocfs mounted ? > > > > > > It appears not. > > > > It appears to be strange that you even passed pre-build: checks then. > > If you are using linux jdk as bootstrap jdk then linprocfs should > > be mounted and active. > > After more thatn 36 hours of CPU time, I terminated the build. The > java process continued to run so I terminated that manually. A kill - > TERM did not kill it so I resorted to a kill -KILL. Yep. It was reported many times before. Most usual reason is hard dependancy linux_base on linprocfs (in linux jdk case). Second most reported case with such behaviour is mixing threading libraries. Since you are building jdk from scratch I assume linux_base is your problem. NOTE: Actually, I am talking about this issue (linux_base related) only by reports of other people. I never was able to reproduce such behavior on my build machine. :( > This process needs to be cleaner if we expect people to start using > Open Office. > > I am pleased to report this: [linprocfs warning skiped] Did you changed something ? Why it did not appear before ? > After doing the above: > > # mount > /dev/ad0s1a on / (ufs, local) > /dev/ad0s1f on /tmp (ufs, local, soft-updates) > /dev/ad0s1g on /usr (ufs, NFS exported, local, soft-updates) > /dev/ad0s1e on /var (ufs, local, soft-updates) > procfs on /proc (procfs, local) > xeon:/usr/ports/distfiles on /usr/ports/distfiles (nfs) > linprocfs on /usr/compat/linux/proc (linprocfs, local) > > Now why can't the port just do that? Sorry. This is too intrusive change as for me. I prefer to force people do it by hands. At least they'll know how to revert this change in runtime. -- /* Alexey Zelkin && Independent Contractor */ /* phantom(at)FreeBSD.org && http://www.FreeBSD.org/java */ /* phantom(at)cris.net && http://www.FreeBSD.org.ua/ */
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040209164517.GC23768>