[Bug 215579] java/eclipse: Cannot build with poudriere

bugzilla-noreply at freebsd.org bugzilla-noreply at freebsd.org
Wed Dec 28 20:19:40 UTC 2016


https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=215579

--- Comment #4 from Jimmy Kelley <ljboiler at gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Dušan Vejnovič from comment #3)
Those settings won't work for building the i386 version (can't give the entire
machine memory space to the Java VM), and I would like to keep one setting that
works for everything.

My setup for working on this port is a low-powered, 2-core machine with 2Gb RAM
and a 10Gb swap partition.
I *don't* use ZFS, and in Poudriere I *don't* use tmpfs or mfs.  Yes, it's slow
to build eclipse on it (2 hours).  I start by getting the amd64 version
building and tested on the base machine, then build the i386 and amd64 flavors
for all the supported FreeBSD versions in Pourdiere several times from scratch
(I mean *every* dependency), and as long as I don't have any other
memory-eating application (X, Firefox) running, everything builds. And yes,
this machine is busy for a week doing this.

I believe that there are memory allocation issues with the combination of jails
and tmpfs and the Java VM that are happening with Poudriere in that "standard"
configuration you are using.  If something will build outside of Poudriere
(have you tried that?), there should be no reason that it wouldn't build using
Poudriere other than having Poudriere configured incorrectly.  Those lines you
added to your poudriere.conf are not configuring Poudriere itself, but just
being given to the eclipse build process.  So why should the Java VM need more
heap space running *inside* of Poudriere than *outside* of it?

One thing I should note (and maybe have a message printed before the build
actually starts) is that this port also needs *lots* of space in the working
directory while building before it's done: nearly 8 Gb.  I have wondered if
that default TMPFS setting in Poudriere of just letting TMPFS grow as needed
might be where the problem really is, but I don't have the hardware to do any
investigation.

Regards,
Jimmy

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.


More information about the freebsd-ports-bugs mailing list