Re: [PATCH v2] travis-ci: Disable C++ on Aarch64 container

[Thomas Huth]

On 08/02/2021 10.16, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
>
> On 2/8/21 6:54 AM, Thomas Huth wrote:
> > On 06/02/2021 21.05, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> > > Travis-CI seems to have enforced memory limit on containers,
> > > and the 'GCC check-tcg' job started to fail [*]:
> > >
> > >     [2041/3679] Compiling C++ object libcommon.fa.p/disas_nanomips.cpp.o
> > >     FAILED: libcommon.fa.p/disas_nanomips.cpp.o
> > >     {standard input}: Assembler messages:
> > >     {standard input}:577781: Warning: end of file not at end of a line;
> > > newline inserted
> > >     {standard input}:577882: Error: unknown pseudo-op: `.lvl35769'
> > >     {standard input}: Error: open CFI at the end of file; missing
> > > .cfi_endproc directive
> > >     c++: fatal error: Killed signal terminated program cc1plus
> > >     compilation terminated.
> >
> > If disabling C++ "fixes" the issue, ok ...
> > Otherwise, we should maybe rather limit the amount of parallel jobs
> > there instead? (i.e. compiling with "make -j1" in the worst case?)
>
> I exhausted my Travis-CI credits (frankly I don't plan to pay for it
> with my own money).

Yeah, same for me.

> I'm happy with any patch (directly removing this job if it is not cared
> of?) as long it silences the failure reports we get on IRC on each
> merge.

Ok, I wanted to send a PR with my other Travis->Gitlab patches today or 
tomorrow anyway, so I could also throw in your patch here to try to silence 
these failures (unless Alex wants to take this patch through his tree within 
the next days anyway)... then let's see whether disabling C++ is enough, and 
if not, we can still try my suggestion instead.

 Thomas