Re: UPDATE: pkg 2.1.0 looks to be making official bulk builds of packages take much longer [a specific package with large time factor]

On Apr 7, 2025, at 09:44, Mark Millard wrote: > On Apr 7, 2025, at 08:14, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > >> On Mon 07 Apr 08:07, Mark Millard wrote: >>> . . . >> >> Listing like this is clearly not any useful, the problem we have is the >> performance changes depending on what is happening in par

Re: elfcopy: not found

Sent with Proton Mail secure email. On Monday, April 7th, 2025 at 9:50 PM, Sulev-Madis Silber wrote: > --- boot1.efi --- > SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH=1704067200 elfcopy -j .peheader -j .text -j .sdata -j .data > -j . > dynamic -j .dynsym -j .rel.dyn -j .rela.dyn -j .reloc -j .eh_frame > --output

Re: pfil_default_to_drop

> On Apr 8, 2025, at 6:36 AM, Robert Austen > wrote: > > > > From: Robert Austen > > Sent: April 7, 2025 4:33 PM > To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org > mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>>; > freebsd-...@freebsd

elfcopy: not found

--- boot1.efi --- SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH=1704067200 elfcopy -j .peheader -j .text -j .sdata -j .data -j . dynamic -j .dynsym -j .rel.dyn -j .rela.dyn -j .reloc -j .eh_frame --output-target =binary boot1.sym boot1.efi sh: elfcopy: not found 313.12 real 432.90 user44.54 sys make

Fw: pfil_default_to_drop

From: Robert Austen Sent: April 7, 2025 4:33 PM To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org ; freebsd-...@freebsd.org Subject: Fw: pfil_default_to_drop From: Robert Austen Sent: April 7, 2025 4:21 PM To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subje

Re: UPDATE: pkg 2.1.0 looks to be making official bulk builds of packages take much longer [a specific package with large time factor]

On Apr 7, 2025, at 08:14, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > On Mon 07 Apr 08:07, Mark Millard wrote: >> . . . > > Listing like this is clearly not any useful, the problem we have is the > performance changes depending on what is happening in parallel on the > machines. I've been exploring looking fo

Re: UPDATE: pkg 2.1.0 looks to be making official bulk builds of packages take much longer [a specific package with large time factor]

Baptiste Daroussin writes: > Listing like this is clearly not any useful, the problem we have is the > performance changes depending on what is happening in parallel on the > machines. Sounds like increased memory footprint to me ? -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.

Re: UPDATE: pkg 2.1.0 looks to be making official bulk builds of packages take much longer [a specific package with large time factor]

On Apr 6, 2025, at 21:11, Gleb Popov <6year...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 7, 2025 at 2:44 AM Mark Millard wrote: >> >> So: 2 min 31 sec or so difference for overall somewhat over an >> hour, i.e., 151 sec or so. That is under 1 sec per package >> built. > > If the slowdown comes from handl

Re: UPDATE: pkg 2.1.0 looks to be making official bulk builds of packages take much longer [a specific package with large time factor]

On Mon 07 Apr 08:07, Mark Millard wrote: > On Apr 6, 2025, at 21:11, Gleb Popov <6year...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 7, 2025 at 2:44 AM Mark Millard wrote: > >> > >> So: 2 min 31 sec or so difference for overall somewhat over an > >> hour, i.e., 151 sec or so. That is under 1 sec per pa

Re: UPDATE: pkg 2.1.0 looks to be making official bulk builds of packages take much longer

On Sun 06 Apr 13:27, Mark Millard wrote: > [I thought of another question.] > > On Apr 6, 2025, at 10:53, Mark Millard wrote: > > > On Apr 6, 2025, at 08:39, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > > > >> Le 5 avril 2025 06:58:12 GMT+02:00, Mark Millard a > >> écrit : > >>> [This is an update of earlier