Re: wifi-firmware-kmod-release-20241017 is not a unique package name; wifi-firmware-kmod-20241017 also is not

On Wed, 18 Dec 2024, Mark Millard wrote:

> On Dec 18, 2024, at 10:12, Bjoern A. Zeeb <bz@freebsd.org> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 18 Dec 2024, Mark Millard wrote:
>>
>> Hi Mark, ports@,
>>
>>> As an example context, I am referencing:
>>>
>>> https://pkg-status.freebsd.org/ampere2/build.html?mastername=main-armv7-default&build=peb87cb7f3aa2_s48d92db080
>>>
>>> which is showing wifi-firmware-kmod-release-20241017 2 times in Ignored ports:
>>>
>>> # Package Origin Skipped Reason
>>> 1623 wifi-firmware-kmod-release-20241017 net/wifi-firmware-kmod@release 0 Dependent port net/wifi-firmware-iwlwifi-kmod@8000 | wifi-firmware-iwlwifi-kmod-8000-20241017.1500029_1 ignored
>>> 1629 wifi-firmware-kmod-release-20241017 net/wifi-firmware-kmod@release 0 Dependent port net/wifi-firmware-iwlwifi-kmod@22000 | wifi-firmware-iwlwifi-kmod-22000-20241017.1500029_1 ignored
>>
>> Funny.  I'd expect it to try all or just the furst dependency and if
>> that gets ingnored then to also ignore the rest right away.
>> Parallel built problems in pourdierer?
>
> I'll use the log file context to try a different wording to try to make
> clear what I'm reporting. I'm also CC'ing Bryan Drewery so he can cross
> check if I'm just wrong about something.
>
>>
>>> I'll note that here is only one:
>>>
>>> https://pkg-status.freebsd.org/ampere2/data/main-armv7-default/peb87cb7f3aa2_s48d92db080/logs/wifi-firmware-kmod-release-20241017.log
>>>
>>> and it is for the net/wifi-firmware-iwlwifi-kmod@22000 when looking at its content. I appears that log file content replaced the earlier content for net/wifi-firmware-iwlwifi-kmod@8000 (because of the lack of a unique log file name).
>>
>> Are you saying "unique log file name" here as the port name is distinct
>> with the name of the flavor?
>
> As I understand things, package names for a flavor are supposed to indicate the flavor
> explicitly in some way: such a one-to-one correspondence is required as I understand
> things.
>
> net/wifi-firmware-iwlwifi-kmod@8000  is using the package name: wifi-firmware-kmod-release-20241017
> also:
> net/wifi-firmware-iwlwifi-kmod@22000 is using the package name: wifi-firmware-kmod-release-20241017
>
> The 2 flavors have the same package name.

No.  They are both child packages of the metport pacakge.

The metaport has two flavours by the names:

wifi-firmware-kmod-NNNNNNNN
wifi-firmware-kmod-release-NNNNNNNN

The metaport package depends on ports with multiple flavours.
Have a look here:
https://cgit.freebsd.org/ports/tree/net/wifi-firmware-kmod/Makefile

So for example the port:
net/wifi-firmware-iwlwifi-kmod
has flavours:
 	7000
 	8000
 	9000
 	22000
 	ax210
 	bz
which then individually expand to package names like:
 	wifi-firmware-iwlwifi-kmod-FLAVOUR-MMMMMMMMM
with FLAVOUR being one of the above and MMMMMMMM being the version of the
iwlwifi firmware.  And then there is a verions without the -FLAVOUR in
the middle which contains all of the iwlifi firmware which is the
default target for net/wifi-firmware-iwlwifi-kmod -- which the metaport
does not depend on so you are not seeing it there.

Same goes for rtw88, rtw89, ath1[012]k, mt76.

So it's a tree you are looking at.

Very much like the gpu-firmware port for example.


> An example of the consequences:
>
> Go try to find a log file in:
>
> https://pkg-status.freebsd.org/ampere2/data/main-armv7-default/peb87cb7f3aa2_s48d92db080/logs/
>
> for the check of:
>
> net/wifi-firmware-iwlwifi-kmod@8000
>
> There is not one. That is because the package name does not indicate the flavor
> at all and that in turn means that the log file name does not contain a reference
> to the flavor name and the second check replace's the first check's file.
>
> As I understand it, poudriere's infrastructure does not support having multiple
> flavors of a port contributing to the same package for the port (by name).
>
>>
>>> Similarly, that same page is showing wifi-firmware-kmod-20241017 3 times in Skipped ports:
>>>
>>> # Package Origin Reason
>>> 727 wifi-firmware-kmod-20241017 net/wifi-firmware-kmod@default wifi-firmware-ath10k-kmod-qca9377_hw10-20240513.1500029_1
>>> 728 wifi-firmware-kmod-20241017 net/wifi-firmware-kmod@default wifi-firmware-ath10k-kmod-qca6174_hw21-20240513.1500029_1
>>> 729 wifi-firmware-kmod-20241017 net/wifi-firmware-kmod@default wifi-firmware-iwlwifi-kmod-bz-20241017.1500029_1
>>>
>>> (Skipped Packages do not get log files.)
>>>
>>>
>>> As near as I can tell, Package names should be unique, never showing such duplicates on this type of pkg-status page and each Ignored port row should get its own log file left behind.
>>
>> Sorry, so far I do no understand where the actual problem is?  Again, do
>> you mean *package* log files names?
>
> I seem to have messed up for the Skipped ports in my reporting, in that
> the 3 reports do all share the same flavor naming and the same package
> naming: It is not an example like the Ignored ports. My mistake.
>
> Please ignore the Skipped ports part of my report.
>
>> Those dependency packages for wifi-firmware-kmod-NNNNNNNN respectively
>> wifi-firmware-kmod-release-NNNNNNNN are not built for armv7:
>>
>> Makefile.inc:ONLY_FOR_ARCHS=    aarch64 amd64 i386
>>
>> so hopefully the "parent" (metaport) gets skipped as well once the first
>> one "fails" with the IGNORE.
>>
>>
>> If pourdierer does not fully grasp it, so be it.  The port names are
>> unique with the two flavours there are within the ports framework.
>> I'd expect you'd have to file a pourdriererer bug then?
>>
>>
>> Otherwise if I get this entirely wrong, can you please explain it more
>> precisely?
>
>
> ===
> Mark Millard
> marklmi at yahoo.com
>
>

-- 
Bjoern A. Zeeb                                                     r15:7