Re: Failed build for seqan2 on i386

2021-02-14 Thread Steffen Möller
Am 12.02.21 um 22:56 schrieb Aaron M. Ucko: > Andreas Tille writes: > >> But other 32bit architectures like armel and armhf are passing[2]. So I >> fail to see why exactly i386 is failing. Is this possibly an effect of >> bug #917851? > Probably not; dropping the bug to a Bcc. Experimentation

Re: Failed build for seqan2 on i386

2021-02-12 Thread Aaron M. Ucko
Andreas Tille writes: > But other 32bit architectures like armel and armhf are passing[2]. So I > fail to see why exactly i386 is failing. Is this possibly an effect of > bug #917851? Probably not; dropping the bug to a Bcc. Experimentation in an i386 chroot reveals the problem to be

Re: Failed build for seqan2 on i386

2021-02-12 Thread Andreas Tille
On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 04:30:48PM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 11:21:38AM +0100, Hilmar Preuße wrote: > > > But other 32bit architectures like armel and armhf are passing[2]. So I > > > fail to see why exactly i386 is failing. Is this possibly an effect of > > >

Re: Failed build for seqan2 on i386

2021-02-12 Thread Andrey Rahmatullin
On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 11:21:38AM +0100, Hilmar Preuße wrote: > > > You can't adjust anything to get more than 4GB virtual memory on 32-bit > > > architectures. > > > You can try adjusting compilation/linking parameters to make the > > > compiler/linker use less memory though (not sure if the

Re: Failed build for seqan2 on i386

2021-02-12 Thread Andreas Tille
Hi Hilmar, On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 11:21:38AM +0100, Hilmar Preuße wrote: > > But other 32bit architectures like armel and armhf are passing[2]. So I > > fail to see why exactly i386 is failing. Is this possibly an effect of > > bug #917851? > > > Maybe the memory of the whole builder is

Re: Failed build for seqan2 on i386

2021-02-12 Thread Hilmar Preuße
Am 12.02.2021 um 11:01 teilte Andreas Tille mit: On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 02:39:25PM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: Hi, You can't adjust anything to get more than 4GB virtual memory on 32-bit architectures. You can try adjusting compilation/linking parameters to make the compiler/linker use

Re: Failed build for seqan2 on i386

2021-02-12 Thread Andreas Tille
Hi, On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 02:39:25PM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > > I wonder whether this could be simply solved by adjusting the hardware / > > emulation parameters of the according autobuilder. > > > > Am I missing something? > You can't adjust anything to get more than 4GB virtual

Re: Failed build for seqan2 on i386

2021-02-12 Thread Andrey Rahmatullin
On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 10:17:06AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: > in the build log[1] I found > >virtual memory exhausted: Operation not permitted > > I wonder whether this could be simply solved by adjusting the hardware / > emulation parameters of the according autobuilder. > > Am I

Failed build for seqan2 on i386

2021-02-12 Thread Andreas Tille
Hi, in the build log[1] I found virtual memory exhausted: Operation not permitted I wonder whether this could be simply solved by adjusting the hardware / emulation parameters of the according autobuilder. Am I missing something? Kind regards Andreas. [1]