On 9/26/2014 9:45 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 07:57:10PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
I'm starting a new thread because that was what should have been done
several messages earlier. It really isn't realted to "LFS and BLFS Version
7.6 is released:.
...
You seem to be saying that running make with -j1 worked, and
therefore you cannot know where it failed.
What I'm saying is that uncommenting the mozconfig line with -j1
compiled ok, whereas keeping it commented failed. I'm not competent to
figure out why.
Is this i686 or x86_64 ?
x86_64
You said you are using systemd, but I cannot think of anything there
that would ... Oh, are you using pulse ?
Yes.
That is the one thing I do
not build - worked for me when I was testing gnome a year or two
back, but when I tried before that, I was totally unable to make it
work (that was in icewm, not a desktop environment, I sort of assume
Lennart expected a lot of daemons to be running).
All of this is completely experimental for me, and I'm doing it as a
learning experience, so I have a long way to go to get sound stuff working.
For me it happened with BOTH 32.0.1 and 32.0.3.
I'm not sure how many times I have installed 32.0.1, but I am
fairly sure that I built it with -j4 on x86_64, and with -j3 on the
i686 system which only has two cores [ and then built it again on
x86_64 with -j1 to time it, after I knew it worked ].
The original error on i686 was during the install (inluding DESTDIR
installs), and was a Python problem which gave a backtrace of Python
modules.
I also installed the full development environment. What do you get when
you
install that? Where can I learn more about this?
No idea. It does not ring any bells for me.
Ok.
But *someone* with BLFS must know what this means -- otherwise he would not
have put some verbiage about installing the full dev environment in the BLFS
book. Who might that be?
It might be a lingering reference to when xulrunner was in the
book.
Actually I just found (see my earlier email replying to Bruce) that the
statement is in the 7.6 systemd book, but not in the non-systemd book.
It's not in any of the earlier books in the BLFS archives, either.
Back in the day, it looked as if xulrunner would be the basis
for a quicker build of both firefox and thunderbird, but in practice
they were hardly ever on the same version, and everything linked
against it had to be recompiled for each new version. At one time,
some things such as icedtea and gnash needed xulrunner to get some
headers. Now, I think NPAPI-SDK has replaced that.
I don't fully understand all that, but I remember that when I compiled
firefox and thunderbird last November, the process was more painful than
this time around. So, good job, guys!
Alan
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
