Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2025 04:20:01 -0700 From: Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com> To: Olivier Certner <olce@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FYI: 15stable-amd64-quarterly has had 2 successful builds, despite not being distributed yet Message-ID: <EB74F7A5-73DD-4C64-AF7A-7B3FDB4B1604@yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <6109335.Zv9zXsTiuT@ravel> References: <4202286.BRNeRiNLvY@ravel> <D1FDA722-8FB5-441B-AF12-27982564D67B@yahoo.com> <6109335.Zv9zXsTiuT@ravel>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Oct 10, 2025, at 02:48, Olivier Certner <olce@freebsd.org> wrote: > So it seems that the "Queued" ports at the bottom are in fact the "scope" of the build, and ports from this list that were already built during some previous build are just (understandably) excluded from the other numbers. The "Queue" number at top of the page, e.g., like here: >> 24fedaeb4e97: >> Queued Built Failed Skipped Ignored Fetched Remaining >> 992 373 152 121 346 0 0 > is thus inconsistent with the "Queued" ones at the bottom. It is the sum of the numbers from the other categories, so should probably be renamed to "To build" or even simpler to "Total". I like "Total" for the above. > It is also inconsistent with the "queued" data (or whatever exact word which I don't remember right now) that shows up when using ^T during a build. "Showing 1 to 10 of ??,??? entries" is reporting how many port-packages are available in that list displayed above it that have entries for everything in the "scope of the build", to use your terminology. To see that: Click on the # column's control that reverses the "Queued ports" list. The top # will then match the ??,??? entries figure (ignoring the ","). If someone changes the "??,??? entries" definition to be some other type of figure, that will no longer be true unless the list content is also changed to match. Are you suggesting to change the content of the that list and the whole page to make no reference to the "scope of the build" information (no count, no list for such)? Are you suggesting that the list should only list the port-packages that are in the "Total" and, so, that the "entries" figure would have the same value as "Total"? > I think this warrants opening a bug report. Would you please do it if you have some time? The existing "Queued ports" is probably better called: "All port-packages" (Calling the items ports when a port can define multiple packages and pacakges are what is built is odd these days --and has been for a long time.) So if the "scope of the build" information is kept, I expect that its terminology should be changed to avoid ambiguity. I could imagine having lists and figures for both: ) "Total's port-packages" and: ) "All port-packages" Although, I view "Total's port-packages" as more important. Note: If I understand right, such may well be changes to how poudriere works for providing html pages. === Mark Millard marklmi at yahoo.comhome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?EB74F7A5-73DD-4C64-AF7A-7B3FDB4B1604>