Re: ISO image: where is the CLANG compiler?
On Wed, 18 Jan 2017 20:37:26 +0100, O. Hartmann wrote: > Am Wed, 18 Jan 2017 16:38:32 +0100 > Matthias Apitz <g...@unixarea.de> schrieb: > > > Why you do not just boot from USB some mem stick image, mount some disk > > space to /mnt, svn checkout CURRENT to /mnt and build a booteable system > > (world and kernel) and install to DESTDIR=/mnt ? > > > > I do not understand all this hassle? > > > > matthias > > > > Wow! > > As I initially stated, that is EXACTLY what I was inclined to do except > the fact that I > had already an intact /usr/obj and usr/src with a complete compiled system. > > I booted from mem stick and I was lost due to no cc! That is the core problem here: cc is not contained in the USB (memstick) image. It _might_ be contained on the live system media, but I'm not sure about this... > Even for "make installworld" it seems I have to rely on the compiler. > And the images > (ISO, memstick et cetera) provided these days do not contain any clang. Then there would be at least the following option: >From the installation media, you can manually extract the distribution files for the base system and use their content to overwrite your non-functional (zero size) files on disk. The task here is to perform archive extraction, and the extractor should be there (simply because the installer uses it as well). With those tools established, you can recompile your system, or "make installworld" from the already populated /usr/obj subtree. Of course, you need to pay attention to have the _correct_ version. > I try to figure out how to avoid this crazy and useless shrinking > of the ISO images - > somehow when building NanoBSD, there are knobs with which we can > prevent the build and/or > installation of subsets like compiler, toolchain et cetera. The way > such thing is > provided via src.conf and make.conf is fine and sophisticated. But > "RELEASE" seems to > handle things different, and the standard is useless for a rescue > mission. So having a more or less complete (!) live system image (for CD or DVD, depending on result size) would probably be a good idea and a versatile tool in case of emergencies. The size limitations, in my opinion, are okay for CD media (650 MB) and DVD media (4,7 GB), but for USB media, I don't see a significant problem making the image 4 or even 8 GB in size. It's actually quite complicated to buy smaller USB sticks or SD cards (sizes < 4 GB) for the few devices they are still required... FreeBSD has always been a "self-contained" system that could "reproduce itself", given that all the sources and the compilation tools were included with the OS. This should be an important goal to achieve with a USB-based _live_ system, and even if you run it from slow USB (instead of fast HDD or SSD), there are still situations where those systems can prevent you from a complete system re-installation. Additionally, USB provides permanent storage (which CDs and DVDs obviously do not). Of course you can more or less manually create such a live media and prepare an image for it, but it would be really nice if such an image would be provided for download. I imagine the initial tasks to be mostly a buildworld/installword into a custom root directory and then creating an image from it, prepending it with the typical boot loader so it becomes a "disk image" (USB image, of course). > Ich widerspreche der Nutzung oder Übermittlung meiner Daten für > Werbezwecke oder für die Markt- oder Meinungsforschung (§ 28 Abs. 4 BDSG). "Das interessiert uns nicht!" - gez. die Werbewirtschaft. :-) -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Does someone keep track of how long it takes to buildworld/kernel?
On Mon, 16 Jan 2017 07:41:06 -0800, jungle Boogie wrote: > On 13 January 2017 at 12:23, Eric Joyner <e...@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > > It takes forever, but I keep on forgetting to time how long it takes, so I > > don't know how long "forever" is. > > > My last buildworld on a severely under powered i386 for 11stable: 420:41 > minutes > Build kernel is around 85 minutes. Some "manual copy & paste" data from the past (original post is from 2008, repost from 11/2015): *** quote *** FreeBSD 5 on Pentium 4 with 2 GHz and 1 GB RAM: b.world+b.kern: 17494.415u 2562.134s 5:46:42.25 96.4% (with CFLAGS) 17474.169u 2481.368s 5:46:30.40 95.9% (without CLFAGS) 5608.712u 1595.130s 2:13:18.67 90.0% 6382.185u 1788.433s 2:26:36.06 92.8% buildworld: 5086.993u 1431.086s 1:58:16.33 91.8% 11457.047u 2151.158s 3:54:15.31 96.8% buildkernel 2326.380u 234.457s 43:42.15 97.6% 1102.491u 278.194s 25:18.58 90.9% 1182.203u 294.622s 26:12.71 93.9% 1518.402u 310.741s 34:16.96 88.9% 3289.368u 529.669s 1:05:25.90 97.2% installkernel: 5.718u6.898s0:30.97 40.6% 6.655u7.389s0:32.08 43.7% 6.994u7.734s0:33.19 44.3% (...software advance happens here...) FreeBSD 7 on Pentium 4 with 2 GHz and 1 GB RAM: b.world+b.kern: 16574.070u 2516.128s 6:06:03.90 86.9% (with debug) 18232.967u 2427.404s 7:19:49.24 78.2% (with debug) 18992.839u 2569.146s 9:12:00.28 65.1% buildworld: 11457.047u 2151.158s 3:54:15.31 96.8% buildkernel: 3289.368u 529.669s 1:05:25.90 97.2% 3503.732u 524.399s 1:11:05.53 94.4% 4032.019u 572.636s 1:58:29.08 64.7% (with debug) installkernel: 17.396u 12.587s0:46.89 63.9% 18.890u 12.131s1:11.85 43.1% As you can see, 5 hours was a possible value on a single-core single-threat slow-as-ass CPU. But then the system became more advanced, and 7 - 9 hours compile time became possible. :-) *** end quote *** Sadly I don't have a "copy" of my build time on my current home PC, including a Core 2 Duo 4600 with 1.8 GHz and 2 GB RAM, using a SATA disk, with FreeBSD 8-STABLE, but I think it was around 5 hours for everything (including a custom kernel). It would be nice if the build system would automatically issue a log file or at least log message about build time and usage statistics. If it wouldn't tell about my brain's age, I would politely ask to have a "flower box"... ;-) -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: building custom kernel on -current: unknown option COMPAT_LINUX
On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 00:18:06 GMT, Anton Shterenlikht wrote: This is on amd64 r246552 I added options COMPAT_43 options COMPAT_LINUX options COMPAT_LINUX32 to the kernel config, following sys/amd64/conf/NOTES On buildkernel I get: unknown option COMPAT_LINUX What am I missing? Do you also have those (from a working i386 system): # Linux support options COMPAT_LINUX# Enable Linux ABI emulation options LINPROCFS # Enable the linux-like proc filesystemsupport (requires COMPAT_LINUX and PSEUDOFS) options LINSYSFS# Enable the linux-like sys filesystem support (requires COMPAT_LINUX and PSEUDOFS) device lindev options COMPAT_AOUT # Enable i386 a.out binary support (note PSEUDOFS is also needed) -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: building custom kernel on -current: unknown option COMPAT_LINUX
On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 00:31:44 GMT, Anton Shterenlikht wrote: From free...@edvax.de Sun Feb 10 00:29:36 2013 On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 00:18:06 GMT, Anton Shterenlikht wrote: This is on amd64 r246552 I added options COMPAT_43 options COMPAT_LINUX options COMPAT_LINUX32 to the kernel config, following sys/amd64/conf/NOTES On buildkernel I get: unknown option COMPAT_LINUX What am I missing? Do you also have those (from a working i386 system): # Linux support options COMPAT_LINUX# Enable Linux ABI emulation options LINPROCFS # Enable the linux-like proc filesystemsupport (requires COMPAT_LINUX and PSEUDOFS) options LINSYSFS# Enable the linux-like sys filesystem support (requires COMPAT_LINUX and PSEUDOFS) device lindev options COMPAT_AOUT # Enable i386 a.out binary support (note PSEUDOFS is also needed) No, I haven't added those. Are these necessary to have the linux binary compatibility? The handbook only mentions COMPAT_LINUX. I think I had the same question some time ago and found out that if those options are present, the Linux functionality will build properly in the kernel. So I assume they are required. -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
