On Sat, 28 Oct 2017 17:10:47 -0500 Gunner Hooper <[email protected]> wrote:
> I tried using the new gen-event-data.py file. This is the output: > "/root/sources/firefox-52.4.1esr/toolkit/components/telemetry/gen-event-data.py", > > line 9, in <module> > from shared_telemetry_utils import StringTable, static_assert, > ParserError > ImportError: cannot import name ParserError Gunner, If I had to guess, the error resulted because of a version mismatch between gen-event-data.py and the other python files within components/telemetry. In particular, shared_telemetry_utils.py will likely need to be updated. If you should ever want to proceed down this path again, I would try updating all the files within components/telemetry. On Sun, 29 Oct 2017 01:14:31 -0500 Gunner Hooper <[email protected]> wrote: > I decided to try building Firefox 51.0.1. It's been building for a > few hours and it hasn't given me any error yet. I will report > back when it finishes. This is a good idea. You might also want to try the test with a more recent version (e.g., 53.0.3 which should not require rust), even if you can't overcome the SSE issue, at least you would know if the python issue persists in the recent versions. And it's good that that problem shows up early on, before you've gotten many hours into the build. It could be the case that a recent gcc/python/etc. breaks something around 52.4 and that the problem does not exist somewhat earlier or later. Also, it seems it *is* still possible to build Firefox 54 without rust - but you have to patch the code to reverse a change in moz.configure/rust.configure that (simply) removes the --disable-rust option: https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/108876/diff/3#index_header In any case, please do post the result of your 51.0.1 build attempt. On Sun, 29 Oct 2017 01:00:12 +0100 Ken Moffat <[email protected]> wrote: > Missed this part, so only replying now: I assume a pIII only has the > old IDE connectors (40 or 80 pin cable) - SSDs are SATA (or M2 or > whatever) and might require newer SATA : one of my boxes had a VIA > (I think) chip which could do SATA1 but could not do the negotiation > for faster speeds - and failed to recognize SSDs because of that. This can be overcome with an add-on SATA card such as the SYBA/IOcrest SY-PCI40010: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16816124028 > Using machines which are even 5 years old, but only consumer > quality, is already painful if building current packages from source > using recent gcc. I really don't think it's worth the effort of > using older machines unless they are high-end (e.g. 8 threads, > fast-ish memory). I think he understands. Many factors contribute to whether something is worth it, including if there are no constraints on the build time and how the machine is actually used (e.g., as an emergency backup system). For some, the endeavor/challenge may even have value/entertainment in and of itself. Cheers, Mike -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
