Skip to content

Should we continue to support FreeBSD? #14384

Description

@targos

I'm opening this because at the moment, the update to V8 6.0 is blocked by FreeBSD 10 that cannot compile V8 because of a bug in Clang.
I opened an issue about that on May 9 and a suggestion was to upgrade Clang, so I opened another issue on the build repo for that on May 16.
Nothing really happened for about a month and then @kfarnung investigated a bit and found that we would need to update Clang to 3.8 to avoid the bug. @jbergstroem contacted the maintainers of the Node port for FreeBSD and it seems that upgrading Clang is not an option.
That leaves with having to find and apply a workaround to V8 for this bug. I already spent a few hours on this myself without success so far. The thing is, I don't think it's my responsibility (as the one who usually does the V8 upgrades) to fix platform issues.
I would like to question the presence of FreeBSD in the "Tier 2" support type because it seems to me that we don't have enough collaborators who care about it and who are ready to spend the time needed to make it green on our CI.

Refs: nodejs/node-v8#1
Refs: nodejs/build#723

/cc @nodejs/platform-freebsd @nodejs/ctc

Activity

  1. added
    discussIssues opened for discussion and feedback.
    freebsdIssues and PRs related to the FreeBSD platform.
    on Jul 20, 2017
  2. added
    buildIssues and PRs related to Node.js builds or CI infrastructure.
    v8 engineIssues and PRs related to the V8 dependency.
    on Jul 20, 2017
  3. mcollina commented on Jul 20, 2017

    @mcollina
    SponsorMember

    Great work @targos, we all know you tried hard on this. In the last few months I have heard only problems on how hard is to support FreeBSD 10.

    We have two options: do not ship V8 6.0 in Node 8, and be at the risk of missing updates from the V8 team, or do not provide Node 8 in FreeBSD 10 for the time being.

    Considering the overall community interests, I think we should go ahead and land V8 6.0, and ideally release it in Node 8.

    @jbergstroem contacted the maintainers of the Node port for FreeBSD and it seems that upgrading Clang is not an option.

    This means we can run builds with an upgraded Clang? If so, let's run builds and releases with the updated Clang. If there are binaries around, people can still use them, even if it couldn't be packaged.

  4. bnoordhuis commented on Jul 20, 2017

    @bnoordhuis
    Member

    We don't release binaries for freebsd. If clang 3.8 fixes the ICE, then upgrading is what needs to happen.

    Shouldn't be a problem for our CI. If it's a problem for the ports packagers, well, the good news is it's their problem, not ours.

  5. targos commented on Jul 20, 2017

    @targos
    MemberAuthor

    If clang 3.8 fixes the ICE, then upgrading is what needs to happen.

    Then we need to change the requirements in https://github.com/nodejs/node/blob/master/BUILDING.md#unix

    @nodejs/v8 is there version range of Clang that is officially supported by V8 or it's just the latest?

    Clang is what's blocking us to ship V8 6.0, but it's not the only problem we have with FreeBSD. Right now Canary is broken on FreeBSD 10 and 11 and I don't know who I can ask to look into the issue and submit a patch upstream.
    I think that for each platform that we support in Tier 1 and Tier 2, we should have active collaborators who are able to fix issues quickly when they arise. It works very well with SmartOS and PPC for example.

  6. bnoordhuis commented on Jul 20, 2017

    @bnoordhuis
    Member

    is there version range of Clang that is officially supported by V8 or it's just the latest?

    I don't think the V8 people make any guarantee except google's clang fork (and maybe the one version of gcc that's tested in their CI.)

  7. jbergstroem commented on Jul 20, 2017

    @jbergstroem
    Member

    I'm ok with updating clang; the maintainers are both responsive and helpful in patching upstream. They just don't act as much on non-releases/pre-releases.

  8. mcollina commented on Jul 21, 2017

    @mcollina
    SponsorMember

    @jbergstroem let's update clang so we can move forward with landing V8 6.0.

  9. jbergstroem commented on Jul 21, 2017

    @jbergstroem
    Member

    @mcollina sure.

  10. emaste commented on Jul 25, 2017

    @emaste

    I'm not sure why it would be a problem to use a newer Clang to build node packages in FreeBSD 10 - we have many packages that depend on having a newer Clang. (And we can't update Clang in 10.x, because we want 10.x to be buildable from older FreeBSD releases which do not include a compiler that can compile C++11 software). That said, I'm not involved in packaging node on FreeBSD so I could be missing something.

    One of my goals is to support upstream software projects in running on FreeBSD though so feel free to CC me on issues and I will try to find someone to help.

  11. added a commit that references this issue on Jul 26, 2017
  12. nomadlogic commented on Jul 26, 2017

    @nomadlogic

    @targos is there a bug report regarding Canary as per:
    "Clang is what's blocking us to ship V8 6.0, but it's not the only problem we have with FreeBSD. Right now Canary is broken on FreeBSD 10 and 11 and I don't know who I can ask to look into the issue and submit a patch upstream."

    I'd like to take a look at the issue and see if I can help triage and see what I can do to help fix it.

    As @emaste mentions - I'd also be keen to understand why having an updated Clang installed via ports/pkgs as a requirement would be an issue. Is there a thead or PR I can take a look at?

  13. DimitryAndric commented on Jul 26, 2017

    @DimitryAndric

    It would be nice if somebody could retrieve the reproduction files that were reported in the original crash report, e.g:

    Preprocessed source(s) and associated run script(s) are located at:
    c++: note: diagnostic msg: /tmp/wasm-module-87662f.cpp
    c++: note: diagnostic msg: /tmp/wasm-module-87662f.sh
    

    But most likely those artifacts are long gone now? Is there any other good way to reproduce?

  14. mhdawson commented on Aug 1, 2017

    @mhdawson
    Member

    I agree with @targos that the real question is not necessarily how we fix this specific issue (upgrade compiler or something else) but making sure we have enough collaborator/contributors lined up who will help to investigate/resolve issues on FreeBSD. While it would be a shame to not have Node.js build on FreeBSD unless we can identify who is going to jump on those issues it is something we have to consider.

    Should we be making a public call for somebody to step up with the suggestion we may have to drop it otherwise ?

  15. addaleax commented on Aug 1, 2017

    @addaleax
    Member

    I have the impression that, as long as the individuals who are volunteering here to support Node.js on FreeBSD as an effort (anybody who wants to join @nodejs/platform-freebsd, please explicitly raise your hands :) ) are committed to doing so, there is no real problem.

  16. refack commented on Aug 1, 2017

    @refack
    Contributor

    Should we be making a public call for somebody to step up with the suggestion we may have to drop it otherwise ?

    Since this thread got fragmented a bit... AFAICT in #14499 (comment) @emaste and @bradleythughes have officially volunteered.

    @targos and @gibfahn could consider closing their respective threads when they come back from vacation.

  17. targos commented on Aug 3, 2017

    @targos
    MemberAuthor

    @emaste is now in the platform-freebsd team and I invited @bradleythughes. Thank you to both of you for stepping up!
    I think we can close this issue for now.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    buildIssues and PRs related to Node.js builds or CI infrastructure.discussIssues opened for discussion and feedback.freebsdIssues and PRs related to the FreeBSD platform.v8 engineIssues and PRs related to the V8 dependency.

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions