Re: Faster gecko builds with IceCC on Mac and Linux

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 9:10 PM, Jeff Muizelaar wrote: > I have a Ryzen 7 1800 X and it does a Windows clobber builds in ~20min > (3 min of that is configure which seems higher than what I've seen on > other machines). Make sure your power settings are aggressive.

Re: Faster gecko builds with IceCC on Mac and Linux

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 11:42 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 1:12 PM, Ehsan Akhgari > wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Jeff Gilbert wrote: >> >>> I'm interested to find out how the new Ryzen

Re: Faster gecko builds with IceCC on Mac and Linux

I have a Ryzen 7 1800 X and it does a Windows clobber builds in ~20min (3 min of that is configure which seems higher than what I've seen on other machines). This compares pretty favorably to the Lenovo p710 machines that people are getting which do 18min clobber builds and cost more than twice

Re: Faster gecko builds with IceCC on Mac and Linux

On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 1:12 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Jeff Gilbert wrote: > >> I'm interested to find out how the new Ryzen chips do. It should fit >> their niche well. I have one at home now, so I'll test when I

Re: Future of out-of-tree spell checkers?

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:50 AM, Jeff Muizelaar wrote: > On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:08 AM, Henri Sivonen > wrote: > > > > dlopening libvoikko, if installed, and having thin C++ glue code > > in-tree seems much simpler, except maybe for sandboxing.

Re: Faster gecko builds with IceCC on Mac and Linux

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Jeff Gilbert wrote: > I'm interested to find out how the new Ryzen chips do. It should fit > their niche well. I have one at home now, so I'll test when I get a > chance. > Ryzen currently on Linux implies no rr, so beware of that. > On

Re: Faster gecko builds with IceCC on Mac and Linux

They're basically out of stock now, but if you can find them, old refurbished 2x Intel Xeon E5-2670 (2.6GHz Eight Core) machines were bottoming out under $1000/ea. It happily does GCC builds in 8m, and I have clang builds down to 5.5. As the v2s leave warranty, similar machines may hit the market

Re: Rationalising Linux audio backend support

Le mercredi 15 mars 2017 02:24:57 UTC+1, qiana...@gmail.com a écrit : > Am Mittwoch, 15. März 2017 00:11:24 UTC+1 schrieb gfra...@gmail.com: > > So this is were this idea started! > > Great job guys, well, at least firefox is now unusable on Puppy Linux and > > low profile OSS. > > yes, indeed:

Quantum Flow Engineering Newsletter #3

Hi everyone, Another week, another Quantum Flow engineering newsletter! We have a lot to cover, so let me get started. Michael Layzell is getting really close on his work on bug 1346415 in order to collect native stacks from Background Hang

Re: e10s-multi update and tests

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 3:32 AM, Andreas Tolfsen wrote: > Do you use a tracking keyword of some sort for the disabled tests? This work is being tracked in . -- Blake ___

Re: Intent to build (but not enable) WebRender by default on some Nightly platforms

Note that this landed on inbound yesterday and was merged to m-c this morning. If you get strange build errors (bkelly already reported one due to missing the glXGetCurrentContext symbol) it might be because of this. Adding ac_add_options --disable-webrender to your mozconfig should work around

Re: unowned module: Firefox::New Tab Page, help me find an owner

FYI, this was resolved yesterday. Peter DeHann's volunteered to triage the component. Replies to FFx list please. -- Emma On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 6:22 AM, wrote: > I have not been able to find an owner for the Firefox::New Tab Page > bugzilla component (bug 1346908). There

Re: Preferences::RegisterCallback and variants will now do exact, not prefix, matches

On 2017-03-21 10:40 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > On 3/21/17 4:34 PM, Eric Rahm wrote: >> This doesn't affect the behavior of |Preferences::AddStrongObserver| >> which >> does prefix matching, correct? > > That's correct. Same for AddWeakObserver. > > It's a little harder to misuse because it

IPDL error/ unit tests now require a failure reason

Note: this only affects you if you write tests in the ipc/ipdl/test/ipdl/error/ directory. In bug 1319620, I added checking of expected failures for IPDL error unit tests. This will ensure that changes like renaming IPDL keywords won't make the error tests silently start failing for the wrong

Re: e10s-multi update and tests

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 8:56 AM, tapper wrote: > Hi is a11y working yet? > Last time I tried it out it kept crashing. > > ___ > dev-platform mailing list > dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org >

Re: Faster gecko builds with IceCC on Mac and Linux

On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 2:42 AM, Gregory Szorc wrote: > The Lenovo ThinkStation P710 is a good starting point ( > http://shop.lenovo.com/us/en/workstations/thinkstation/p-series/p710/). To help others who follow the above advice save some time: Xeons don't have Intel integrated

Re: Project Stockwell (reducing intermittents) - March 2017 update

On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 10:31 AM, Kartikaya Gupta wrote: > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 6:02 PM, L. David Baron wrote: >> As of 5 days ago, "Treeherder Bug Filer" was not using BUG_COMPONENT >> information. I say this based on: >>

Re: e10s-multi update and tests

On 22/03/2017 23:45, Blake Kaplan wrote: Hello all, As some of you might have noticed, we are now defaulting to 4 content processes on Nightly builds! We're continuing to collect data and planning on running experiments with different numbers of processes to generate more data and allow us to

Re: Rationalising Linux audio backend support

Botond Ballo writes: > Now that this change has hit the release channel, we've started > receiving feedback from a wider range of users, a lot of it in bug > 1345661 [1]. > > I believe the feedback in that thread brings some new information to > the table that we weren't aware of when this

Re: intent to remove: standalone about:addons UI and tests

Kris Maglione 於 3/22/2017 6:38 PM 寫道: On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 08:33:56AM +0900, Mike Hommey wrote: On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 02:36:31PM -0700, Robert Helmer wrote: Currently we support running the about:addons UI in both a standalone window, and also in a browser tab. Firefox has only used the

Re: Revocation protocol idea

Hey, concerns about the viability of such a decentralized systems aside, I still don't understand the advantage of blocking on an API level vs. simply showing the SafeBrowsing error page that we currently have in place. Why would we continue to allow a user to visit a clearly harmful page?

Re: e10s-multi update and tests

Also sprach Blake Kaplan : > As part of our effort to enable e10s-multi on Nightly, we disabled > a few tests that were misbehaving. We've re-enabled most of them > and are on track to finish re-enabling them (after verifying that > the problem was in the test and not the

Re: e10s-multi update and tests

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 2:36 AM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Andrew McCreight > > wrote: > > > > > Though maybe you are asking which processes count against the limit of 4. > > > > Yes, that's what I am asking.

Re: e10s-multi update and tests

On Thursday, 23 March 2017 01:01:16 UTC, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: > Do we have a clear definition of "content process"? I.e. does/will it > include: > > - GMP processes (no?) > - GPU process (probably not?) > - file:// URL processes (probably should?) > - Web Extensions processes (probably

Re: unowned module: Firefox::New Tab Page, help me find an owner

Can you follow up with me in separate email about what posts you're concerned about? I've done most of the rejection moderation on the list, and usually reply to people explaining why and where a better venue would be. Most stuff that has been moderated is exactly what's listed there as being

Re: Please do NOT hand-edit web platform test MANIFEST.json files

> Fun fact: lots of JSON documents also evaluate as Python data structures. > So if you prepend "foo = " and throw that into eval(), you can > magically evaluate a JSON document into a Python variable. Of course, > eval() is a security concern. But people blindly execute code in > mozilla-central