Subject: Re: CVS commit: pkgsrc/mk/bulk
To: Roland Illig <>
From: Alistair Crooks <>
List: pkgsrc-changes
Date: 11/20/2005 09:56:44
On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 09:05:00PM +0100, Roland Illig wrote:
> Alistair G. Crooks wrote:
> >Module Name:	pkgsrc
> >Committed By:	agc
> >Date:		Sat Nov 19 19:21:47 UTC 2005
> >
> >Modified Files:
> >	pkgsrc/mk/bulk:
> >
> >Log Message:
> >Allow the bulk builds to work by adding security/audit-packages as a
> >BULK_PREREQ package.
> This slows down the pkgsrc build on my machine by approximately 8 
> seconds per package. Do you really want that?

Bulk builds from scratch run for 5 days on a 3.6 GHz P4, 7 days on a
2.8 GHz P4.

Now *I* am not the one who made the changes which forced
audit-packages to be installed, or SKIP_AUDIT_PACKAGES to be defined
to "yes" before a bulk build run.  I already have
ALLOW_VULNERABLE_PACKAGES in my /etc/mk.conf, and I still found that
having the audit-packages package installed was the only way to make
bulk builds work properly.

More than anything, I want my bulk builds to work properly.

> I rather suggest emphasizing that there is the SKIP_AUDIT_PACKAGES=yes 
> variable, which should be set to "yes" for bulk builds. Then it is not 
> necessary at all to add security/audit-packages to BULK_PREREQ.

I've reverted this change.  Someone else can add the appropriate bits
to make bulk builds work properly.  I'd like to know why this wasn't
done as part of the other audit-packages changes (I know Roland didn't
make those changes).  If SKIP_AUDIT_PACKAGES needs to be set, why not
set it?  What I'd really like to have here is someone being proactive,
and not forcing the bulk builders to find the problems with
infrastructure changes.

Altogether, there has been far too much upheaval over the last few
days which was ill-considered, not wholly tested, and the drivers
for which are still unclear to me.