From owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 15 22:20:11 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35E0237B404 for ; Thu, 15 May 2003 22:20:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A4D643FA3 for ; Thu, 15 May 2003 22:20:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h4G5KAUp072308 for ; Thu, 15 May 2003 22:20:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h4G5KAKw072307; Thu, 15 May 2003 22:20:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 22:20:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200305160520.h4G5KAKw072307@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org From: Ruslan Ermilov Subject: Re: misc/52122: make release does not use proper binar X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: Ruslan Ermilov List-Id: Bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 05:20:11 -0000 The following reply was made to PR misc/52122; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Ruslan Ermilov To: "David O'Brien" Cc: John Hay , bug-followup@freebsd.org Subject: Re: misc/52122: make release does not use proper binar Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 08:17:43 +0300 On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 06:12:27PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote: > On Fri, May 16, 2003 at 12:01:06AM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > > > > > In this case the release died near the end (release.9 target). It was > > > > > easy to update the running kernel and reboot. Now we wanted to restart > > > > > the release w/o starting from scratch. This release build included ports > > > > > README's and Docs, and thus takes a very long time to build. To not have > > > > > to start from scratch, I did "chroot ${CHROOT} /bin/sh" and then ran "rm > > > > > /tmp/.world_done ; /mk" which should have restarted the release build and > > > > > done the mimimum work to finish the release. It didn't because of the > > > > > cross-release commit that removed the installworld w/in the ${CHROOT}. > > > > > This bit not only me, but another person also building an Alpha snapshot. > > > > > > > > Maybe the issue is more of documentation? I know hindsight makes it easy, > > > > but an installworld inside the chroot area or "world DESTDIR=/chrootarea" > > > > should have been enough to get the binaries updated. > > > > > > It is, and was. The problem is restarting with /mk used to do this for > > > you. It stopped and the only documentation was hidding in the commit > > > log. > > > > > It used to, but only "if [ ! -f /tmp/.world_done ]", and you were > > way beyond that point, was it release.9? > > Yes as stated clearly above, it was release.9 -- the very last release > target. > > > In older days, it was necessary to ALWAYS upgrade to a recent > > before attempting to "make release". > > So? JKH and msmith at WCCDROM liked it that way. Such issues as this > came up in discussions when I worked there. > So to always be on the safe side for native builds, you should follow that old rule too -- this will guarantee that you will use fresh bits. The rule is simple: the fresh world SHOULD be able to release itself; the world other than the one that you're trying to release COULD be able to release, with a reasonable chance of working. If you're not sure, upgrade kernel/world first. On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 07:00:56PM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > Murray, > > Just wonder, what environment do you use to produce these > snapshots/releases. Do you use the old canonical way of > first upgrading the building system to the level of the > snapshot/release, or do you just use the "compatible" > system like 4.7-STABLE? On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 09:17:40AM -0800, Murray Stokely wrote: > On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 07:00:56PM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > > Just wonder, what environment do you use to produce these > > snapshots/releases. Do you use the old canonical way of > > The build machines are running 4.8-RC and 4.8-PRERELEASE. They aren't > running exactly the same level of the snapshot/release, but within 2 > weeks or so. On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 09:26:35AM -0800, Murray Stokely wrote: > On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 07:20:30PM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > > Great! :-) > > > > And what environment you're planning to use to roll the final > > 4.8-RELEASE, when it comes to this point? > > It will probably be 4.8-RELEASE or within just a few days of that. Of > course, if you're asking this because you want to make a disruptive > change, then that might affect what I'm able to use. ;) Why? Cheers, -- Ruslan Ermilov Sysadmin and DBA, ru@sunbay.com Sunbay Software AG, ru@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD committer, +380.652.512.251 Simferopol, Ukraine http://www.FreeBSD.org The Power To Serve http://www.oracle.com Enabling The Information Age