Re: Why did main's [so: 15's] new aarch64 snapshots have PINE64 (not -LTS) instead of RPI? (has -LTS too)

From: Glen Barber <gjb_at_freebsd.org>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2023 04:30:19 UTC 
As I think I have made very clear in the past, no, not publicly.  

The RPI build failed because of some “offset.Inc” file being spammed with null bytes.

The better question imho, is why does PINE64 now succeede when it has been failing, and if there is any direct correlation between the two.

Glen
Sent from my phone.
Please excuse my brevity and/or typos.

> On Oct 28, 2023, at 12:21 AM, Emmanuel Vadot <manu@bidouilliste.com> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 18:28:22 +0000
> Glen Barber <gjb@freebsd.org> wrote:
> 
>>> On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 10:35:39PM -0700, Mark Millard wrote:
>>> https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-snapshots/2023-October/000308.html
>>> [New FreeBSD snapshots available: main (20231019 fb7140b1f928)]
>>> 
>>> reported (note "RPI"):
>>> 
>>> o 15.0-CURRENT aarch64 GENERIC
>>> o 15.0-CURRENT aarch64 RPI
>>> o 15.0-CURRENT aarch64 PINE64-LTS
>>> o 15.0-CURRENT aarch64 PINEBOOK
>>> o 15.0-CURRENT aarch64 ROCK64
>>> o 15.0-CURRENT aarch64 ROCKPRO64
>>> o 15.0-CURRENT riscv64 GENERIC
>>> o 15.0-CURRENT riscv64 GENERICSD
>>> 
>>> https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-snapshots/2023-October/000310.html
>>> [New FreeBSD snapshots available: main (20231026 d3a36e4b7459) ]
>>> 
>>> reported (note "PINE64" without "-LTS" and lack of "RPI"):
>>> 
>>> o 15.0-CURRENT aarch64 GENERIC
>>> o 15.0-CURRENT aarch64 PINE64
>>> o 15.0-CURRENT aarch64 PINE64-LTS
>>> o 15.0-CURRENT aarch64 PINEBOOK
>>> o 15.0-CURRENT aarch64 ROCK64
>>> o 15.0-CURRENT aarch64 ROCKPRO64
>>> o 15.0-CURRENT riscv64 GENERIC
>>> o 15.0-CURRENT riscv64 GENERICSD
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> Last week, RPI succeeded while PINE64 failed.  This week, the opposite
>> occurred.
>> 
>> Glen
>> 
> 
> Any logs ?
> 
> -- 
> Emmanuel Vadot <manu@bidouilliste.com> <manu@freebsd.org>
>