Re: [gentoo-user] OO Build Failed
Richard Fish wrote: Can you retry with: CFLAGS=-O2 -march=pentium3 -pipe Awesome, this seems to have done the trick - thanks! R -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] OO Build Failed
On 7/30/06, Randy Barlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Richard Fish wrote: Can you retry with: CFLAGS=-O2 -march=pentium3 -pipe Awesome, this seems to have done the trick - thanks! BTW, -O3 uses *a lot* more ram to compile compared to -O2. Indeed, gcc will sometimes take 200-500MB of RAM to compile a single C++ module. So combined with MAKEOPTS=-j2, and only 512MB of RAM total, yeah, I think you ran out of memory. In fact, you may want to drop to MAKEOPTS=-j1 permanently. Swapping is simply not something you want to do when compiling...it is too damn slow. If you run so many jobs that some get pushed to swap, it would be far faster to run one job at a time without swapping! -Richard -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] OO Build Failed
Richard Fish wrote: BTW, -O3 uses *a lot* more ram to compile compared to -O2. Indeed, gcc will sometimes take 200-500MB of RAM to compile a single C++ module. So combined with MAKEOPTS=-j2, and only 512MB of RAM total, yeah, I think you ran out of memory. In fact, you may want to drop to MAKEOPTS=-j1 permanently. Swapping is simply not something you want to do when compiling...it is too damn slow. If you run so many jobs that some get pushed to swap, it would be far faster to run one job at a time without swapping! Thanks for the advice Richard! R -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] OO Build Failed
Randy Barlow schrieb: Richard Fish wrote: Can you retry with: CFLAGS=-O2 -march=pentium3 -pipe [...] Also, why are you running an i386 CHOST? You should probably have used an i686 stage3 tarball... Hmm, somehow I must not have noticed that. You are certainly right though - it is possible to migrate my system to the i686 CHOST gracefully? CHOST isn't that important at all. Much much more important are the CFLAGS, and here especially -march (or -mtune -mcpu). If you're using a Pentium 3 and have done emerge -e world once, then all is fine. Alexander Skwar -- The important thing is not to stop questioning. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] OO Build Failed
Alexander Skwar wrote: CHOST isn't that important at all. Much much more important are the CFLAGS, and here especially -march (or -mtune -mcpu). If you're using a Pentium 3 and have done emerge -e world once, then all is fine. I haven't done the emerge -e thing, but shouldn't everything eventually make its way to those CFLAGS anyway just because it will be upgraded? R -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-user] OO Build Failed
Howdy. I added the gtk use flag to my system and did the emerge --update --deep --newuse world thing, and everything worked fine until it got to Open Office. The failure message is: g++: Internal error: Killed (program cc1plus) Please submit a full bug report. See URL:http://bugs.gentoo.org/ for instructions. dmake: Error code 1, while making '../../../../unxlngi6.pro/slo/SlideSorterView.obj' '---* tg_merge.mk *---' ERROR: Error 65280 occurred while making /var/tmp/portage/openoffice-2.0.3/work/ooo-build-2.0.3.0/build/OOO_2_0_3/sd/source/ui/slidesorter/view make: *** [stamp/build] Error 1 !!! ERROR: app-office/openoffice-2.0.3 failed. Call stack: ebuild.sh, line 1539: Called dyn_compile ebuild.sh, line 939: Called src_compile openoffice-2.0.3.ebuild, line 251: Called die Is this a bug that I should file, or a user error do you think? It build for several hours before it gets to this point, but it will fail consistently at this same point. Any ideas? Randy -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] OO Build Failed
* Randy Barlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Is this a bug that I should file, or a user error do you think? It build for several hours before it gets to this point, but it will fail consistently at this same point. Any ideas? obviously an bug. Please file a report. BTW: I didn't ever get OO built by myself, neither w/ gentoo, nor vanilly. I really wonder what they're doing there! It's even worse than mozilla :( cu -- - Enrico Weigelt== metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/ - Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce: http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions: http://patches.metux.de/ - -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] OO Build Failed
Enrico Weigelt wrote: obviously an bug. Please file a report. Filed! It's at http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=142053 if anyone is interested in following it. R -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] OO Build Failed
On 7/28/06, Randy Barlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Enrico Weigelt wrote: obviously an bug. Please file a report. Filed! It's at http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=142053 if anyone is interested in following it. Can you retry with: CFLAGS=-O2 -march=pentium3 -pipe Also, why are you running an i386 CHOST? You should probably have used an i686 stage3 tarball... -Richard -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] OO Build Failed
Richard Fish wrote: Can you retry with: CFLAGS=-O2 -march=pentium3 -pipe I'm currently trying to upgrade to the newer version as per the recent gentoo security advisory concerning OO, but if that doesn't work, I'll give the less aggressive CFLAGS a try :) Also, why are you running an i386 CHOST? You should probably have used an i686 stage3 tarball... Hmm, somehow I must not have noticed that. You are certainly right though - it is possible to migrate my system to the i686 CHOST gracefully? -Richard Thanks! Randy -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
