[Debian-med-packaging] Bug#759794: insighttoolkit4: FTBFS on amd64 with ENOSPC

[Philipp Kern]

On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 10:32:50PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 08:10:41PM +0200, Philipp Kern wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 03:34:32PM +0200, Gilles Filippini wrote:
> > > insighttoolkit4 repeatedly FTBFS on amd64 [1] because of ENOSPC. A
> > > manual build on porterbox barriere.debian.org reported a need of ~44GB
> > > while it failed on buildd barber at approx 37GB of disk space.
> > > 
> > > [1] https://buildd.debian.org/status/logs.php?pkg=insighttoolkit4&arch=amd64
> > > 
> > > I really don't know how the build space could be optimized. The only
> > > solutions I can think of right now are:
> > > * force the build on a buildd with at least 44GB of free space
> > > * do a source + amd64 binary upload instead of source only upload.
> > > 
> > > Note: this is blocking the ongoing hdf5 transition.
> > 
> > I wonder if we should standardize on 50 GB everywhere. But then at some point
> > there needs to be a cut-off. And if the packaging could be optimized to need
> > less (i.e. avoid unnecessary disk use), that'd be splendid.
> 
> I actually don't have an amd64 buildd that has both enough RAM and
> disk space.  Brahms is the only one with enough disk space, but it
> only has 2 GB of RAM and gcc gets OOM killed there.

I'd argue that 2 GB of RAM for a builder is a tad silly these times.

Kind regards
Philipp Kern
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-med-packaging/attachments/20140830/6da48344/attachment.sig>