[Starlingx-discuss] build-pkgs cannot complete std build----aclocal: too many loops

Saul Wold sgw at linux.intel.com
Tue Oct 2 17:23:53 UTC 2018 


On 10/02/2018 10:19 AM, Scott Little wrote:
> Merged on master.  Lets everyone give it a test build.  It's never been 
> better than 50/50 to hit us, so we want as many test builds as possible 
> to be sure this fixes it.
> 

Thanks Scott, I will start up a new build on master.

Sau!

> Scott
> 
> 
> On 18-10-02 09:29 AM, Saul Wold wrote:
>>
>> Folks,
>>
>> What's the status of the review of these PRs for stx-ceph, this is 
>> still causing build breakage in the 2018.10 branch.
>>
>> I think this will require an update to the 2018.10 manifest also
>>
>> Sau!
>>
>>
>> On 09/29/2018 06:47 AM, Sun, Austin wrote:
>>> Hi Cindy and All:
>>>      I have generated two PR, one is for master and another is for 
>>> r/2018.10.  please help check if the PR process is correct .
>>>
>>> -[0] https://github.com/starlingx-staging/stx-ceph/pull/2
>>> -[1] https://github.com/starlingx-staging/stx-ceph/pull/3
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>> BR
>>> Austin Sun.
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Xie, Cindy
>>> Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2018 6:03 PM
>>> To: Sun, Austin <austin.sun at intel.com>; Saul Wold 
>>> <sgw at linux.intel.com>; Scott Little <scott.little at windriver.com>; 
>>> starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
>>> Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] build-pkgs cannot complete std 
>>> build----aclocal: too many loops
>>>
>>> Austin,
>>> Thanks for the finding - can we generate pull-requests for 
>>> ax_require_define.m4 against StarlingX-staging?
>>>
>>> Thx. - cindy
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Sun, Austin [mailto:austin.sun at intel.com]
>>> Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2018 4:41 PM
>>> To: Saul Wold <sgw at linux.intel.com>; Scott Little 
>>> <scott.little at windriver.com>; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
>>> Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] build-pkgs cannot complete std 
>>> build----aclocal: too many loops
>>>
>>> Hi Saul , Scott and Erich:
>>>
>>>      I met same issue in my local env,  I did some study aclocal 
>>> script and some test.
>>>              According your analysis , 
>>> autoconf-archive-2017.03.21-1.el7.noarch.rpm was added , which 
>>> included a lot of system m4 files used by aclocal,  according [0] and 
>>> [1],  '--install' option will cp system macros (.m4) to local m4 
>>> folder ,
>>>
>>>  From error log:
>>>
>>> BUILDSTDERR: aclocal: installing 
>>> /usr/share/aclocal/ax_require_defined.m4 to m4/ax_require_defined.m4
>>> BUILDSTDERR: aclocal: installing 'm4/ax_require_defined.m4' from 
>>> '/usr/share/aclocal/ax_require_defined.m4'
>>> BUILDSTDERR: aclocal: running: cp 
>>> /usr/share/aclocal/ax_require_defined.m4 m4/ax_require_defined.m4
>>> BUILDSTDERR: aclocal: running aclocal anew, because some files were 
>>> installed locally
>>> BUILDSTDERR: aclocal: error: too many loops
>>>
>>> ax_require_defined.m4 cause this issue, If  copied 
>>> ax_require_defined.m4 to code base stx/git/ceph/m4/,  ceph can be 
>>> built successfully .
>>>
>>> since cannot upload change to starlingx-staging , please use [3] 
>>> ax_require_defined.m4 file which is same as file in 
>>> autoconf-archive-2017.03.21-1.el7.noarch.rpm package
>>>
>>> - About  why ax_require_defined.m4 is a must for ceph build:
>>>      ax_cxx_compile_stdcxx_11.m4 is upgraded from local serial 4 to 
>>> system serial 18 including in autoconf-archive rpm , which is using 
>>> AX_REQUIRE_DEFINED defined in ax_require_defined.m4
>>>       have tried force upgrade local m4/ax_cxx_compile_stdcxx_11.m4 
>>> to serial 19 ,  it can solve this issue too.
>>>
>>> -[0] 
>>> https://www.gnu.org/software/automake/manual/html_node/Serials.html#Serials 
>>>
>>> -[1] 
>>> https://www.gnu.org/software/automake/manual/html_node/aclocal-Invocation.html#aclocal-Invocation 
>>>
>>> -[2] 
>>> http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=autoconf-archive.git;a=blob_plain;f=m4/ax_require_defined.m4 
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>> BR
>>> Austin Sun.
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Saul Wold [mailto:sgw at linux.intel.com]
>>> Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2018 8:20 AM
>>> To: Scott Little <scott.little at windriver.com>; 
>>> starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
>>> Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] build-pkgs cannot complete std build
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 09/28/2018 01:39 PM, Scott Little wrote:
>>>> Ok, we've seen 3 ceph failures in our last 6 builds.
>>>>
>>>> The common factor:  tpm2-tools builds on 'b0' before ceph builds.
>>>>
>>>> Our theory.  The buildRequires of tpm2-tools causes autoconf-archive
>>>> to be installed... which installs a bunch of .m4 files in
>>>> /usr/share/aclocal ... which causes ceph grief when it calls aclocal.
>>>>
>>>> I don't really know automake or aclocal all that well.  I'm assuming
>>>> /usr/share/aclocal is acting something like a cache, but it's a cache
>>>> whos contents are incompatible with ceph.
>>>>
>>>> Do we have any autotools / aclocal / m4 experts in the house?
>>>>
>>>> Possible fixes:
>>>> - ceph: can we tell it to not use the aclocal cache... explicitly (a
>>>> flag to aclocal?)  ... or implicitly (update ceph's m4 files so they
>>>> look 'newer' than the cache)?
>>>
>>> Not sure about that, I would have to dig deeper into aclocal, it's 
>>> been a while since I dug into that.
>>>
>>>> - tpm2-tools: Can we remove the dependence on autoconf-archive? No
>>>> other package we build seems to need it.
>>>>
>>> A quick scan show that the autoconf-archive was put in there for 
>>> travis support, and goes away this past March upstream when they 
>>> coverted to using a container for travis.  If we could use a newer 
>>> version of tpm2 that might solve this.
>>>
>>> Maybe Erich's solution can work
>>>
>>> Sau!
>>>
>>>
>>>> Scott
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 18-09-27 04:45 PM, Saul Wold wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> And of course it worked the third time!
>>>>>
>>>>> So, I lost the good logs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sau!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 09/27/2018 12:56 PM, Scott Little wrote:
>>>>>> On 18-09-27 03:53 PM, Scott Little wrote:
>>>>>>> Our latest build, based on code synced at 2018-09-27T15:28:00  UTC,
>>>>>>> built successfully.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It took three attempts to get ceph built.  The first two passes
>>>>>>> aborted quickly due to missing packages.  The final pass did not
>>>>>>> exhibit the 'aclocal: too many loops'**issue.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The only build I have that exhibited the too many loops error was a
>>>>>>> snapshot on 2018-09-20T15:50:40 UTC
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I do have a designer with an older snapshot that seems to hit it
>>>>>>> regularly, so I'll work with him and see if we can learn more.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think we need more data from the community
>>>>>>> - Who's build is failing on ceph with *aclocal: too many loops?*
>>>>>>> - Who is building successfully ?
>>>>>>> - Who can build only intermittently?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Info to collect for failed builds:
>>>>>> - repo sync timestamp
>>>>>>> - build command used?
>>>>>>> - Was it a new workspace, a cleaned workspace, or a previously used
>>>>>>> workspace?
>>>>>> - $MY_WORKSPACE/CONTEXT
>>>>>>> - $MY_WORKSPACE/build-std.log
>>>>>>> - $MY_WORKSPACE/std/results/*/ceph-*/*.log
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For successful builds, same info. Rather than full build logs, I
>>>>>>> can settle for:
>>>>>>> - grep '\(Success building\|iteration\|building ceph\)'
>>>>>>> $MY_WORKSPACE/build-std.log
>>>>>>> - grep compute_resources: build-std.log
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 18-09-27 02:21 PM, Saul Wold wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 09/26/2018 09:16 AM, Scott Little wrote:
>>>>>>>>> aclocal 'too many loops' has been popping up sporadically for a
>>>>>>>>> week or two now.  Possibly 7.5 related.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I suspect that there is a build order and/or race condition
>>>>>>>>> element to this.   It often goes away if you just run build-pkgs
>>>>>>>>> a second time.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am seeing this failure also, but it does not go away after a
>>>>>>>> second rebuild.  I have the lastest stx-root (build-tools) with
>>>>>>>> the recent patches.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is this directly related to the fuzz issue or is there something
>>>>>>>> else we need to address in CEPH itself.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is blocking my local build.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sau!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Starlingx-discuss mailing list
>>>>>>> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
>>>>>>> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discus
>>>>>>> s
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Starlingx-discuss mailing list
>>>>>> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
>>>>>> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Starlingx-discuss mailing list
>>> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
>>> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Starlingx-discuss mailing list
>>> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
>>> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss
>>>
>

More information about the Starlingx-discuss mailing list