On 14/1/19 8:05 am, Chris Johns wrote: > On 11/1/19 4:31 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: >> ----- Am 11. Jan 2019 um 0:11 schrieb Chris Johns chr...@rtems.org: >> >>> On 10/1/19 11:17 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: >>>> This patch resulted in this mail report issue: >>>> >>>> Your mail to 'build' with the subject >>>> >>>> Build Linux: FAILED 6/rtems-epiphany on x86_64-linux-gnu >>>> (epiphany-rtems6-gcc-76fb04650b2bacd33eaff257f08fabcc237ec885-newlib-fbd3835384fa586fd32ce80280d81bb51ab042ba-x86_64-linux-gnu-1) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Is being held until the list moderator can review it for approval. >>>> >>>> The reason it is being held: >>>> >>>> Message body is too big: 1093190 bytes with a limit of 256 KB >>>> >>> >>> Are you asking for the size limit on the list to be raised? >> >> No, but is this the normal size for a failed report? >> > > It should not be. I will accept the post and then we can see the reason. >
The report captures the last part of the build and it looks like the lines in the section of the libstdc++ library being built are long. The use of full length hashes in gcc and newlib has increased the path lengths. I increased the number of lines captured a while ago because the number of cores being used when building meant distance in the output between the error and the end of the log can be a long way. Maybe a smarter parser should be added and just the error logged? Chris _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
