libxul build hit the roof!

Da Rock freebsd-ports at herveybayaustralia.com.au
Sat Jan 1 01:11:36 UTC 2011


On 01/01/11 07:07, Chris Rees wrote:
> I would argue that anyone messing with CFLAGS should expect and know how to
> fix trouble like that. This would also save noise.
>    
Unless they're just following a HowTo off a site to improve performance. 
Besides that, is it really that hard to offer a warning?
> Chris
>
> --------
>
> Sorry for top-posting, Android won't let me quote, but K-9 can't yet do
> threading.
> On 31 Dec 2010 05:42, "Da Rock"<freebsd-ports at herveybayaustralia.com.au>
> wrote:
>    
>> On 12/31/10 02:47, jhell wrote:
>>      
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> On 12/29/2010 18:04, Da Rock wrote:
>>>
>>>        
>>>> I got it worked out in the end, but it still took 2G+ memory to build;
>>>> so my suggestion is a warning to EU in the make process that this could
>>>> take a lot of memory to build, and some suggestions as to how to prevent
>>>> or workaround the problem so they don't go whining on the list about it
>>>> being broken.
>>>>
>>>>          
>>> Turning off OPTIMIZED_CFLAGS for 'libxul, firefox*&  thunderbird*' ports
>>> would have stopped all this swapping from happening.
>>>
>>> Is there a specific reason why you changed it from its defaults ? is
>>> there really anything to gain ? in respect to 'libxul'...
>>>
>>>        
>> I see your point and I'll raise you a does it matter? There are sites
>> and howto's on improving performance overall, especially regarding the
>> revival of older machines. The recommendation on a lot of these is to
>> put CFLAGS+= -O -pipe in the make.conf. If they already have low memory,
>> then they'll be up the creek won't they? And the updates won't happen so
>> they'll simply be broken and unsure of why.
>>
>> I'd say a simple note to say whats up is definitely in order, to prevent
>> a lot of traffic. I don't believe thats too hard to do, given jdk16 and
>> OOO have messages reflecting HDD space. I only noticed the issue because
>> I watched it happen- given the little relevance that most (including
>> yourself) put on it, it would easily be overlooked unless a simple
>> solution was presented. The only message you get from say portupgrade is
>> new compiler error, most would then put it in the too hard basket.
>> _______________________________________________
>> freebsd-ports at freebsd.org mailing list
>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>>      
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-ports at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>    



More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list