Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: "Håkon Alstadheim" <hakon@×××××××××××××××.no>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] portage sandbox path-depth limit ?
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2018 12:30:16
Message-Id: 65e0913f-22bf-2df7-6f24-f8e51296de1a@alstadheim.priv.no
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] portage sandbox path-depth limit ? by Mick
1 Den 30. okt. 2018 10:01, skrev Mick:
2 > On Tuesday, 30 October 2018 06:30:23 GMT Håkon Alstadheim wrote:
3 >> I'm having fun enabling "test" in FEATURES on my gentoo-desktop. One
4 >> interesting failure, that brings to mind build failures I have had in
5 >> the past:
6 >>
7 >> Building sys-apps/mlocate-0.26-r2, I get
8 >>
9 >> 43: updatedb: Very deep hierarchy FAILED
10 >> (updatedb.at:261)
11 >>
12 >> Trying to reproduce, as root I do "make check" in the work/mlocate-0.26/
13 >> , and the test passes.
14 >>
15 >> 43: updatedb: Very deep hierarchy ok
16 >>
17 >> I'd really like to get to the bottom of this, as I believe it must have
18 >> the same root-cause as issues I have had compiling large packages such
19 >> as firefox.
20 >>
21 >> Re-running both the emerge and the make check, I get the same results.
22 >> emerge fails, make check succeeds. I made a local copy of the ebuild and
23 >> inserted a "ulimit -a" in pre_src_test.
24 >>
25 >> ulimit from root-shell:
26 >>
27 >> # ulimit -a
28 >> core file size (blocks, -c) unlimited
29 >> data seg size (kbytes, -d) unlimited
30 >> scheduling priority (-e) 0
31 >> file size (blocks, -f) unlimited
32 >> pending signals (-i) 59958
33 >> max locked memory (kbytes, -l) 16384
34 >> max memory size (kbytes, -m) unlimited
35 >> open files (-n) 1024
36 >> pipe size (512 bytes, -p) 8
37 >> POSIX message queues (bytes, -q) 819200
38 >> real-time priority (-r) 0
39 >> stack size (kbytes, -s) 8192
40 >> cpu time (seconds, -t) unlimited
41 >> max user processes (-u) 10000
42 >> virtual memory (kbytes, -v) unlimited
43 >> file locks (-x) unlimited
44 >>
45 >> ulimit from emerge:
46 >>>>> Source compiled.
47 >> core file size (blocks, -c) unlimited
48 >> data seg size (kbytes, -d) unlimited
49 >> scheduling priority (-e) 0
50 >> file size (blocks, -f) unlimited
51 >> pending signals (-i) 59958
52 >> max locked memory (kbytes, -l) 16384
53 >> max memory size (kbytes, -m) unlimited
54 >> open files (-n) 1024
55 >> pipe size (512 bytes, -p) 8
56 >> POSIX message queues (bytes, -q) 819200
57 >> real-time priority (-r) 0
58 >> stack size (kbytes, -s) 9788
59 >> cpu time (seconds, -t) unlimited
60 >> max user processes (-u) 10000
61 >> virtual memory (kbytes, -v) unlimited
62 >> file locks (-x) unlimited
63 >>
64 >>>>> Test phase: sys-apps/mlocate-0.26-r2
65 >> I have plenty of space in my portage temp directory (/pt):
66 >>
67 >> # df -hT ./
68 >> Filsystem Type Størrelse Brukt Tilgj. Bruk% Montert på
69 >> /dev/xvdc ext4 163G 8,0G 147G 6% /pt
70 >>
71 >> Portage temp is at /pt due to the earlier mentioned issues with firefox.
72 >>
73 >> At my wits end here. Anyone ?
74 > I have not looked or used the test FEATURES of portage, but have also noticed
75 > over time certain packages fail to build on machines with low RAM. As low
76 > here I consider anything less than 4G. It seems each thread is now consuming
77 > so much memory they cumulatively use up all RAM available and then start
78 > swapping endlessly until the compilation invariably fails. Increasingly more
79 > and more packages have been suffering from this, the last two I noticed are
80 > qtwebkit and qtwebengine.
81 >
82 > My solution has been to create a package.env file in which I specify MAKEOPTS
83 > limiting the number of jobs and average load for any of these packages which
84 > chew up all the RAM.
85 Memory should not be a problem here. Fails with only that one emerge
86 running,
87 succeeds if run directly as root, or with FEATURES="-sandbox -usersandbox".
88
89 Memory is >14GB:
90 # vmstat
91 procs -----------memory---------- ---swap-- -----io---- -system--
92 ------cpu-----
93  r  b   swpd   free   buff  cache   si   so    bi    bo   in   cs us sy
94 id wa st
95  3  4  28416 6904608 174112 4616144    0    0    65   266   13    4 10 
96 2 84  4  0

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] portage sandbox path-depth limit ? Andrew Savchenko <bircoph@g.o>