[PATCH] Fix 'build_max_size_human' ref. before assignment

[Chris Johns]

On 15/1/19 11:31 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 13/01/2019 23:17, Chris Johns wrote:
>> On 14/1/19 8:05 am, Chris Johns wrote:
>>> On 11/1/19 4:31 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>>> ----- Am 11. Jan 2019 um 0:11 schrieb Chris Johns chrisj at rtems.org:
>>>>
>>>>> On 10/1/19 11:17 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>>>>> This patch resulted in this mail report issue:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your mail to 'build' with the subject
>>>>>>
>>>>>>      Build Linux: FAILED 6/rtems-epiphany on x86_64-linux-gnu
>>>>>> (epiphany-rtems6-gcc-76fb04650b2bacd33eaff257f08fabcc237ec885-newlib-fbd3835384fa586fd32ce80280d81bb51ab042ba-x86_64-linux-gnu-1)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is being held until the list moderator can review it for approval.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The reason it is being held:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>      Message body is too big: 1093190 bytes with a limit of 256 KB
>>>>>>
>>>>> Are you asking for the size limit on the list to be raised?
>>>> No, but is this the normal size for a failed report?
>>>>
>>> It should not be. I will accept the post and then we can see the reason.
>>>
>> The report captures the last part of the build and it looks like the lines in
>> the section of the libstdc++ library being built are long. The use of full
>> length hashes in gcc and newlib has increased the path lengths.
>>
>> I increased the number of lines captured a while ago because the number of cores
>> being used when building meant distance in the output between the error and the
>> end of the log can be a long way.
>>
>> Maybe a smarter parser should be added and just the error logged?
> 
> When I look for tool chain build errors I simply go to the end of the log file
> and then search backwards for "error:".
> 

There are linker and I think assembler errors which do not work as well ...

https://git.rtems.org/rtems-tools/tree/tester/rt/check.py#n447

Chris