From nobody Sat Oct 28 04:30:19 2023 X-Original-To: freebsd-arm@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4SHRR80Kv4z4yNXQ for ; Sat, 28 Oct 2023 04:30:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gjb@freebsd.org) Received: from mail0.glenbarber.us (mail0.glenbarber.us [IPv6:2607:fc50:1:2300:1001:1001:1001:face]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mail0.glenbarber.us", Issuer "Gandi Standard SSL CA 2" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4SHRR753lHz3NJF; Sat, 28 Oct 2023 04:30:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gjb@freebsd.org) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none Received: from smtpclient.apple (50.29.233.174.res-cmts.swb2.ptd.net [50.29.233.174]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: gjb) by mail0.glenbarber.us (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8DFBF4F8A7; Sat, 28 Oct 2023 04:30:20 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 mail0.glenbarber.us 8DFBF4F8A7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to ARM processors List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-arm List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Subject: Re: Why did main's [so: 15's] new aarch64 snapshots have PINE64 (not -LTS) instead of RPI? (has -LTS too) From: Glen Barber In-Reply-To: <20231028062114.2e2d4fd1476ad666bebb50ed@bidouilliste.com> Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2023 00:30:19 -0400 Cc: Mark Millard , freebsd-arm Message-Id: <4C788D8C-5C2B-432A-ACF1-E2CCFC551F43@freebsd.org> References: <20231028062114.2e2d4fd1476ad666bebb50ed@bidouilliste.com> To: Emmanuel Vadot X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (20G81) X-Spamd-Bar: ---- X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:36236, ipnet:2607:fc50::/36, country:US] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4SHRR753lHz3NJF As I think I have made very clear in the past, no, not publicly. =20 The RPI build failed because of some =E2=80=9Coffset.Inc=E2=80=9D file being= spammed with null bytes. The better question imho, is why does PINE64 now succeede when it has been f= ailing, 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 wrote= : >=20 > =EF=BB=BFOn Fri, 27 Oct 2023 18:28:22 +0000 > Glen Barber wrote: >=20 >>> 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)] >>>=20 >>> reported (note "RPI"): >>>=20 >>> 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 >>>=20 >>> https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-snapshots/2023-October/000310= .html >>> [New FreeBSD snapshots available: main (20231026 d3a36e4b7459) ] >>>=20 >>> reported (note "PINE64" without "-LTS" and lack of "RPI"): >>>=20 >>> 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 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>=20 >> Last week, RPI succeeded while PINE64 failed. This week, the opposite >> occurred. >>=20 >> Glen >>=20 >=20 > Any logs ? >=20 > --=20 > Emmanuel Vadot >=20