Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 15 May 2021 16:37:35 -0700
From:      bob prohaska <fbsd@www.zefox.net>
To:        Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com>
Cc:        FreeBSD ports <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Python 37/38 conflict, was Re: Trubles compiling lxqt on RPi4
Message-ID:  <20210515233735.GA58311@www.zefox.net>
In-Reply-To: <0B407A98-E0D4-461E-BFD8-E02019E96757@yahoo.com>
References:  <0B407A98-E0D4-461E-BFD8-E02019E96757.ref@yahoo.com> <0B407A98-E0D4-461E-BFD8-E02019E96757@yahoo.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 07:29:15PM -0700, Mark Millard wrote:
> bob prohaska fbsd at www.zefox.net wrote on
> Fri May 14 01:35:28 UTC 2021 :
> 
> > Would use of poudriere help with this sort of problem?
> > It isn't trivial to configure, but this sort of difficulty
> > has been growing ever worse. I didn't want to deal with the 
> > complexity and overhead, but maybe it's time. 
> > 
> 
> I happen to use ports-mgmt/poudriere-devel and it
> avoids such issues but does have build-time tradeoffs
> and the like. (I'll note that I presume the sort of
> sustem tuning to avoid Out Of Memory kills and I try
> to scale to avoid a literal out of swap space
> problems.)
> 
So far, OOM problems haven't appeared on the 8GB Pi4. If they
do, the problems will be recognizable & the solutions known.

> I'll start with very overall background for port
> building because I do not understand your context
> or goals. Otherwise my material could end-up
> implicitly be picking from the alternatives in
> an inappropriate way. Some of this is relevant to
> (all?) other forms of port building as well.
>

Build time is less a problem than completion. This is a single machine, 
self-hosting for kernel and world. The only installation target for ports 
is itself, at least for now.
 
> Some basic questions will be:
> 
> A) ZFS vs. UFS? (There are some configuration setting(s)
> dependent on which.)
> 

The machine uses UFS, on a 1 TB mechanical hard disk over USB3
Memory is 8GB, plus a like amount of swap. So far, no swap has been used.


> I currently have examples of both: I've started
> experimenting with ZFS again in some contexts, after
> years of not using it. No individual context is using
> a mix of both and I use ZFS in contexts with >= 8
> GiBytes of RAM. I do not try to tune it for small
> memory contexts (small on ZFS's scale).
> 
> 
> B) How a builder establishes a world-context to execute in?
> For reasons of testing patches and such I build and
> install a world into a directory tree and have poudriere
> use that tree instead of poudriere installing or even
> building its own world in a tree. (And I've never done it
> any other way.)
>

I'm a bit confused here. I _think_ the world-context is the kernel
and root directory, all living under / . If it's particular to the
port being built please clarify.
  
> I do this with separate world-trees for aarch64 vs. armv7
> on an aarch64 system so I build for armv7 in a faster
> context with more RAM and then transfer materials to
> the armv7 system for pkg to use for pkg commands. (I've
> not set up a server/client context.)
> 
> You could, of course, just deal with "native" and ignore
> the RPi* aarch64's supporting doing armv7 builds.
> 
For now the machine is building ports for itself. I'd guess
that's native. 

> I use the same buildworld for updating the running kernel
> and world and for installing the world used for poudriere
> when the same OS vintage/variation is to be used for both.
>

 
> If you prebuild, there will be questions of what paths
> you want to use to reference the for-poudriere build
> trees.
>
I'm a bit confused here. I _think_ the world-context is the kernel
and root directory, all living under / . If it's particular to the
port being built please clarify.

At this point there's only one OS, aarch64 -current.
It's building the port and will run the finished port
Not familiar with the term "prebuild".
 
> 
> C) How a builder establishes a ports tree? For reasons of
> testing patches and such I have a /usr/ports tree of my
> own (sometimes under another name) and have poudriere use
> that tree instead of making its own.  (And I've never done
> it any other way.)
> 
> I use the same /usr/ports for both aarch64 and armv7, so
> only the one copy.
> 
> You might want a different path than /usr/ports if you
> pre-establish the ports tree.
> 
> 
There is presently a single ports tree, cloned via git, at
/usr/ports. I'd prefer not to duplicate it, for sake of sanity
and space, the disk being only 1 TB. Sanity's even scarcer. 8-)



> D) What FreeBSD versions to target? I do not happen to
> use ports that must track the kernel version in detail
> so I can target a releng/13's release/13.?.? and use the
> ports for stable/13 as well. In fact, I can generally
> get away with using those same ports on main [so: 14],
> being explicit about the ABI for the pkg commands.
>
The target is the host running poudriere, in this case 
14.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 14.0-CURRENT #1 main-49c894ddc
It appears to be a simpler case than intended for poudriere.

 
> You might use ports to drive displays and such in a way
> that leaves you required to track kernel versions more
> closely. But if it is only RPi*'s, then may be not for
> that. But there are other ports around that violate the
> clean separation vs. kernel details.
> 
> To some extent this gets into "how many builds to cover
> all the systems?". That in turn can influence how the
> systems are set up, such as to eliminate some builds
> being needed. Your context might be simple, with only
> one type of context to cover.
>
Just one build for each port, for the system it's built on. 
> 
> E) Build as root? As non-root?
> 
> I happen to only have done build as root but the
> systems are not used for other activities. There
> could be ownership/permission issues that I've
> not run into.
>

It isn't apparent that root vs non-root build matters,
though in principle the less root activity the better.

It looks like changes to the config file would include

NO_ZFS=yes
FREEBSD_HOST=https://download.FreeBSD.org
RESOLV_CONF=/etc/resolv.conf

USE_TMPFS=no
NOHANG_TIME=28800
MAX_EXECUTION_TIME_EXTRACT=14400
MAX_EXECUTION_TIME_INSTALL=14400
MAX_EXECUTION_TIME_PACKAGE=28800

Thanks for reading this far!

bob prohaska
 



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20210515233735.GA58311>