ports/java/jdk14 looping on install?
dan at langille.org
Mon Feb 9 08:49:07 PST 2004
On 9 Feb 2004 at 18:45, Alexey Zelkin wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 07:58:37AM -0500, Dan Langille wrote:
> > On 9 Feb 2004 at 0:20, Alexey Zelkin wrote:
> > > On Sun, Feb 08, 2004 at 02:09:40PM -0500, Dan Langille wrote:
> > > > On 8 Feb 2004 at 18:23, Alexey Zelkin wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > is linuxprocfs mounted ?
> > > >
> > > > It appears not.
> > >
> > > It appears to be strange that you even passed pre-build: checks then.
> > > If you are using linux jdk as bootstrap jdk then linprocfs should
> > > be mounted and active.
> > After more thatn 36 hours of CPU time, I terminated the build. The
> > java process continued to run so I terminated that manually. A kill -
> > TERM did not kill it so I resorted to a kill -KILL.
> Yep. It was reported many times before. Most usual reason is hard
> dependancy linux_base on linprocfs (in linux jdk case). Second most
> reported case with such behaviour is mixing threading libraries. Since
> you are building jdk from scratch I assume linux_base is your problem.
> NOTE: Actually, I am talking about this issue (linux_base related) only by
> reports of other people. I never was able to reproduce such behavior
> on my build machine. :(
> > This process needs to be cleaner if we expect people to start using
> > Open Office.
> > I am pleased to report this:
> [linprocfs warning skiped]
> Did you changed something ? Why it did not appear before ?
I changed nothing. It may have appeared, but if it did, it had
scrolled off the screen.
> > After doing the above:
> > # mount
> > /dev/ad0s1a on / (ufs, local)
> > /dev/ad0s1f on /tmp (ufs, local, soft-updates)
> > /dev/ad0s1g on /usr (ufs, NFS exported, local, soft-updates)
> > /dev/ad0s1e on /var (ufs, local, soft-updates)
> > procfs on /proc (procfs, local)
> > xeon:/usr/ports/distfiles on /usr/ports/distfiles (nfs)
> > linprocfs on /usr/compat/linux/proc (linprocfs, local)
> > Now why can't the port just do that?
> Sorry. This is too intrusive change as for me. I prefer to force
> people do it by hands. At least they'll know how to revert this
> change in runtime.
Dan Langille : http://www.langille.org/
BSDCan - http://www.bsdcan.org/
More information about the freebsd-ports