Blacklisted packages #16
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user
No description provided.
Delete Branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Here are some that are going to stay with specific reasons:
Current list:
Packages build without LTO
Cut down on blacklisted packagesto Blacklisted packagesI just removed
and added
Added back
skia-sharp58
, which is some sort of Schroedinger package: exists and not exists simultaneously.svn2git vs archweb
Added back
ctags
, some weird versionctags-1:r20210106+g08b1c490c-1
was being build, over and over again. Needs more investigating. Maybe the combination of +git and epoch breaks something.Removed
pacman
, see #41 for more.Added
chezmoi
, see #43 for details.Added
bandwhich
, see #45.Added
rust
,llvm
andxf86-video-intel
to build whithout LTO.See https://git.harting.dev/anonfunc/ALHP.GO/issues/54#issuecomment-727 for more.
Removed
skia-sharp58
andchezmoi
, since ALHP can now handle orphaned PKGBUILD files.One question, is php-fpm blacklisted from the repo for any cause in particular?
I'm asking because a lot of php related packages are available but not that one.
Edit: Same for php-fpm7
php-fpm
should not be blacklisted, and in current version ALHP it can't be, because it's part ofphp
as a split-package, and these can't be blacklisted.As far as I can see,
php-fpm
is available in bothx86-64-v2
andx86-64-v3
:Oh my god, I'm so dumb.
I was checking it with the packages.html and it's not there, but it is effectively in the repo.
I'm sorry, you are correct.
Added
julia
, since its checks take an enormous amount of ram. This may be a candidate for a no-checks-list in the future.@anonfunc what do you mean compiling gcc for x86 64-v3 would blow up the build process?
@diegor Meaning it broke building locally (AUR packages for example) since gcc gets version mismatches in its plugins.
@anonfunc What do you mean by plugins? Compiler front ends?
@GunpowderGuy Don't think so. This was many years ago, but the different versioning somehow broke local compiling. If you want to test it again, be my guest, but I doubt this is has changed without us doing anything about that.
@anonfunc Do you have sources that can help me better understand this problem ? Someone else ought to have had it.
Improving the performance of gcc is already desirable but particularly in arch due to AUR
You can have a look at ALHP's makepkg.confs here. Use the same settings, pull
gcc
withasp checkout gcc
and build it withmakepkg
orextra-x86_64-build
. After you have installed it, try compiling some gcc based aur or repo packages and see what happens.Why OpenCV and related packages are blacklisted?
Good question, I don't quite remember. I'll unlist it, maybe I can find out why I had it blacklisted (or maybe it does build fine now).
EDIT: Seems to fail: https://github.com/opencv/opencv/issues/23893
It seems that networkmanager is failed to build and libnm package is missing as a result.
@entrider Should be provided from the official repos as usual.
Probably xxhash should be blacklisted just for v3: https://alhp.dev/logs/x86-64-v3/xxhash.log
Builds fine with x86-64-v2 tho.
Also
gstreamer
build failed with x86-64-v3, but not with v2.Are
telegram-desktop
,qt5-webengine
andnodejs
blacklisted? Why?We can just leave it as failed. This way new upstream versions get build and we can see if anything is improving.
See #201. Also, this issue is really not the pace to discuss failing packages. If you open any upstream issues for failing packages, feel free to open a corresponding issue here so we can track its progress.
They are. Probably because they took too long to build. With a more powerful buildserver we could add them back, but that is not an option right now.
Can
mold
be reconsidered? currentlymake test
passes for me in 35s with x86-64-v3 enabled (locally at least)Is there any way we can help to make this happen? either host a powerful server, buy you a threadripper, or donate X amount of dollars to make this economically viable
I actually added back nodejs on the newer server already. Maybe that can be done for webkit as well, I'll have a look. As for the buildserver hardware: It's currently powered by a Ryzen 7600, so of course there is more performance to be had.
Cheapest Threadripper with AVX512 you can get here is about $1800 + $800 mainboard. May be a little overkill (7960X, 24C/48T).
That's obviously quite a bit of money to spend on something like this, so I would not ask that of anybody. Just giving you a figure here.
I'll test mold again once I'm back home, currently traveling.
@AvianaCruz Can you open a new issue for this please? This issue is meant to track the list of packages we exclude from building.
Addthunderbird
, since ALHP's version crashes with pgpme integration, making external samrtcards unusable.Nevermind, it also crashes with the normal version now. Add thunderbird back.
Have you considered mirroring these packages from the main repos, so that ALHP can be used as the only repository? That would avoid any issues with mismatches. Maybe not versioning issues when upgrading.
Yes I considered that. Would add a lot of packages of course, but it would prevent at least some of these windows where one can potentially break something. Need to think about that, because its not as simple as just downloading them from a mirror, since they need to match the current package state.