Hey Raphaël!
This weekly DVD run just tooke ~15h to run compared to the normal ~30m
or so. Checking the stuff in the log here, I'm thinking that this
"Deep recursion on subroutine" message is very likely due to your
changes in commit cc4e1fa450a074ef1428bf678a57cdf8b0d0f0e5. Could you
take a look please?
On Mon, Aug 08, 2022 at 07:56:49PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
Hey RaphaÄ—l!
This weekly DVD run just tooke ~15h to run compared to the normal ~30m
or so. Checking the stuff in the log here, I'm thinking that this
"Deep recursion on subroutine" message is very likely due to your
changes in commit cc4e1fa450a074ef1428bf678a57cdf8b0d0f0e5. Could you
take a look please?
Checking on the build machine just now, I could see that a number of sort_deps processes were chewing up ~40G of memory each. I'm going to
revert your commit for now and re-trigger the weekly build.
--
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.
steve@einval.com
"I used to be the first kid on the block wanting a cranial implant,
now I want to be the first with a cranial firewall. " -- Charlie Stross
Hey Raphaël!
This weekly DVD run just tooke ~15h to run compared to the normal ~30m
or so. Checking the stuff in the log here, I'm thinking that this
"Deep recursion on subroutine" message is very likely due to your
changes in commit cc4e1fa450a074ef1428bf678a57cdf8b0d0f0e5. Could you
take a look please?
This weekly DVD run just tooke ~15h to run compared to the normal ~30m
or so. Checking the stuff in the log here, I'm thinking that this
"Deep recursion on subroutine" message is very likely due to your
changes in commit cc4e1fa450a074ef1428bf678a57cdf8b0d0f0e5. Could you
take a look please?
On lun., 08 août 2022, Steve McIntyre wrote:
This weekly DVD run just tooke ~15h to run compared to the normal ~30m
or so. Checking the stuff in the log here, I'm thinking that this
"Deep recursion on subroutine" message is very likely due to your
changes in commit cc4e1fa450a074ef1428bf678a57cdf8b0d0f0e5. Could you
take a look please?
Ah, sure, that seems quite likely. I did not have the issue in my
tests, but I tested with a partial mirror as created by simple-cdd so I
quite likely did not hit the problematic recursive dependency.
Can you point me to the debian-cd configuration that I shall use to reproduce >the issue?
Ah, sure, that seems quite likely. I did not have the issue in my
tests, but I tested with a partial mirror as created by simple-cdd so I
quite likely did not hit the problematic recursive dependency.
Can you point me to the debian-cd configuration that I shall use to reproduce the issue?
Hello,
On mar., 09 août 2022, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
Ah, sure, that seems quite likely. I did not have the issue in my
tests, but I tested with a partial mirror as created by simple-cdd so I
quite likely did not hit the problematic recursive dependency.
Can you point me to the debian-cd configuration that I shall use to reproduce
the issue?
So the issue was not trivial to reproduce. FWIW, it's only reproducible in >bullseye, for some reason buster was coping fine with it.
But I got it reproduced and the problem was due to packages which have
strong "Recommends" like libapreq2-dev which has "Recommends:
libapreq2-doc (= 2.13-7+b3)" which is not satisfiable. It would never stop >its recursion because the version found was not good for it.
So in the end I have a new patch in the hertzog/bug601203 branch. I'm
doing some further tests but it seems to solve the issue: >https://salsa.debian.org/images-team/debian-cd/-/commit/ca9ac8deac5c1436f4b311a22a34a56f236dfe05
But as I investigated I found more things to fix, like quite
some dead code: >https://salsa.debian.org/images-team/debian-cd/-/commit/e77ade6033445571092e8663ad94a24c7e882b03
I'm going to push this soon but I would love if someone else could
do a test run and ensure it doesn't break anything else.
I have created a merge request to make it easier to review the code if
anyone wants to do it: >https://salsa.debian.org/images-team/debian-cd/-/merge_requests/26
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 300 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 53:58:24 |
Calls: | 6,712 |
Files: | 12,243 |
Messages: | 5,355,325 |