On 08-11-2014 15:37, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: > On 08-11-2014 13:46, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: >> On 08-11-2014 13:36, Bruce Dubbs wrote: >>> David Brodie wrote: >>>> On 08/11/14 12:07, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: >>>>>
>>>>> ... two systems: >>>>> >>>>> LFS7.1 host (SVN-20120311) (error occurs) >>>>> >>>>> LFS7.6 (no error with enable-optimize >>>>> >>>> >>>> The following relates specifically to Firefox 32.0.1 (and Seamonkey >>>> 2.29), but may well still apply to 33.0.3. >>>> >>>> There is apparently a gcc compiler issue causing the Python script, >>>> 'packager.py' to fail while it is precompiling a list of Javascript >>>> scripts, using Mozilla's (internal) js shell, 'xpcshell' - essentially, >>>> it (i.e. xpcshell) falls over about half way through the list, as your >>>> log demonstrates. >>>> >>>> Now as I understand it, for gcc 4.9.x, certain 'undefined' behaviour has >>>> been changed, in particular, the handling (signed) integer overflow, so >>>> that any program that was tacitly relying on a certain behaviour will >>>> have problems, which could very well be what is happening here (i.e. >>>> some counter is overflowing). >>>> >>>> See: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1047803 for some >>>> discussion. >>>> >>>> (In other words, it is a gcc problem, not a Python problem) >>>> >>>> Using ac_add_options --enable-optimize="-O2" (rather than >>>> --disable-optimize), appears to cure the problem for both packages. >>> >>> That's interesting. On my 686 system I still have gcc-4.7.0. I'll try >>> to build it with the full --enable-optimize and see what happens since >>> the bug report indicates the problem started with gcc-4.8. >>> >>> If that doesn't work, I'll try --enable-optimize="-O2" > It is impressive the difference in performance (start time, downloading > page time, ...). > > If I understand correctly, you are testing FF. I will try to build SM > with optimization, now. Success with SM latest. Much faster, with optimizations. Thanks again, David!!! > Bruce, would you prefer doing the modifications yourself, or fix after I > edit the SM and FF pages? Bruce, if you prefer doing the changes, I don't mind. -- []s, Fernando -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
