[Bug 208154] please increase ARG_MAX
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208154 Thierry Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://bugs.freebsd.org/bu ||gzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2417 ||10 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-amd64 To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-amd64-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
[Bug 208154] please increase ARG_MAX
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208154 Pedro F. Giffunichanged: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |Unable to Reproduce Status|New |Closed --- Comment #9 from Pedro F. Giffuni --- (In reply to Jon Boden from comment #8) Sorry for the late reply ... More than not enabling mergelibs, you have to explicitly disable it. Our LibreOffice port does that: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports/head/editors/libreoffice/Makefile?revision=416875=markup#l219 Not sure how Debian does but I suspect they also have it building. I can't really justify changing the FreeBSD value for one port where we manage to workaround the issue. I will close the issue for now but it is a good reference for the future. Thanks for testing! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-amd64 To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-amd64-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
[Bug 208154] please increase ARG_MAX
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208154 --- Comment #8 from Jon Boden--- Created attachment 168767 --> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=168767=edit LibreOffice build failure Hi The result of my test: increasing it to 1048320 as Pedro suggested is enough to make LibreOffice build succeed. Note: Removing --enable-mergelibs does NOT work around the problem. The only way I managed to build LibreOffice (Ubuntu version 1:5.0.2-0ubuntu1) is by increasing ARG_MAX. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-amd64 To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-amd64-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
[Bug 208154] please increase ARG_MAX
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208154 --- Comment #5 from Jon Boden--- (In reply to Konstantin Belousov from comment #3) So it could be increased on 64-bit architectures only? P.S. I'm preparing the test with 1048320 as requested by Pedro P.P.S. Btw we've been running a heavy load amd64 system (builder machine) with the initial patch for months and haven't found stability issues so far. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-amd64 To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-amd64-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
[Bug 208154] please increase ARG_MAX
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208154 Konstantin Belousovchanged: What|Removed |Added CC||a...@freebsd.org, ||k...@freebsd.org --- Comment #3 from Konstantin Belousov --- ARG_MAX sizes the exec_map submap, the current formula is 16 * round_page(PATH_MAX + ARG_MAX). Increasing ARG_MAX would consume (much) more KVA on KVA-starved architectures, basically all 32bits, esp. PAE-like configs. I believe that this was discussed at least once, with Andrey (?). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-amd64 To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-amd64-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
[Bug 208154] please increase ARG_MAX
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208154 --- Comment #2 from Pedro F. Giffuni--- For reference, here are some values in other systems: /netbsd/sys/sys/syslimits.h #define ARG_MAX (256 * 1024) /* max bytes for an exec function */ /illumos-gate/usr/src/head/limits.h #define _ARG_MAX32 1048320 /* max length of args to exec 32-bit program */ #define _ARG_MAX64 2096640 /* max length of args to exec 64-bit program */ #ifdef _LP64 #define ARG_MAX _ARG_MAX64 /* max length of arguments to exec */ #else /* _LP64 */ #define ARG_MAX _ARG_MAX32 /* max length of arguments to exec */ #endif /* _LP64 */ I have no opinion, but since our own LibreOffice builds haven't seem to have reached that issue(?), perhaps it's better to avoid a huge bump in that value. Perhaps the _ARG_MAX32 is sufficient for UbuntuBSD? (Cool project BTW). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-amd64 To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-amd64-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
[Bug 208154] please increase ARG_MAX
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208154 --- Comment #1 from Jon Boden--- Just for reference, the one from Linux is: $ getconf ARG_MAX 2097152 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-amd64 To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-amd64-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"