Michał Górny posted on Thu, 01 Aug 2013 13:33:48 +0200 as excerpted:
> LLVM has peek build space consumption around:
>
> - 400-550M without clang (depending on targets),
> - 950-1200M with clang,
> - 16G with clang & USE=debug (assertions, checks).
Ouch!
Thanks for the heads-up. I didn't reali
On 22:30 Thu 25 Jul , Ryan Hill wrote:
> I don't think we will be moving to 5 very soon. I have nothing
> against it but Mike might be a harder sell. I want USE deps so I'm
> going to do 2 at least, then get the prefix guys on board for 3.
The council deprecated 1/2 in April so I'd avoid t
On 01/08/13 23:53, Michał Górny wrote:
> That would be a lot of effort if upstream doesn't accept it and we end
> up patching it all the way...
kmod isn't complex and probably could be made even a bit more compact,
considering also the pace of its development and the kind of changes in
the last mo
Dnia 2013-08-01, o godz. 23:03:11
Luca Barbato napisał(a):
> On 01/08/13 19:46, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > El jue, 01-08-2013 a las 18:11 +0200, Luca Barbato escribió:
> >> On 01/08/13 17:36, Michał Górny wrote:
> >>> So esystemd and ekmod now?
> >>
> >> You know my stance on systemd, for me it is a
On 01/08/13 19:54, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> still, first the patch goes upstream and after upstream review and
> commit to git it goes in tree otherwise we opt to the fallback and
> disable udev from lvm2/cryptsetup when USE=static is enabled (like
> cryptsetup upstream suggested to me) gentoo-spe
On 01/08/13 19:46, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> El jue, 01-08-2013 a las 18:11 +0200, Luca Barbato escribió:
>> On 01/08/13 17:36, Michał Górny wrote:
>>> So esystemd and ekmod now?
>>
>> You know my stance on systemd, for me it is a jumble of bad and
>> interesting ideas not so soundly implemented, I do n
El mié, 31-07-2013 a las 21:34 +0200, Pacho Ramos escribió:
> El mié, 31-07-2013 a las 15:19 -0400, Mike Gilbert escribió:
> > On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > > El mié, 31-07-2013 a las 12:11 -0700, Zac Medico escribió:
> > >> On 07/31/2013 12:03 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> >
On Thu, Aug 01, 2013 at 07:36:12PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> Dnia 2013-08-01, o godz. 13:32:28
> Rich Freeman napisał(a):
>
> > On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> > > Dnia 2013-08-01, o godz. 17:17:35
> > > Luca Barbato napisał(a):
> > >
> > >> On 01/08/13 17:04, William
On 01/08/13 19:11, Luca Barbato wrote:
On 01/08/13 17:36, Michał Górny wrote:
So esystemd and ekmod now?
You know my stance on systemd, for me it is a jumble of bad and
interesting ideas not so soundly implemented, I do not have much time or
will to play with that thing.
kmod on the other han
El jue, 01-08-2013 a las 14:05 +0400, Sergey Popov escribió:
[...]
> Some cluster things in lvm does not work in mine setup with shared
> builds. Only USE="static static-libs" is only working combination.
> Something related with cluster file locking library - it does not load
> if it is build shar
El jue, 01-08-2013 a las 18:11 +0200, Luca Barbato escribió:
> On 01/08/13 17:36, Michał Górny wrote:
> > So esystemd and ekmod now?
>
> You know my stance on systemd, for me it is a jumble of bad and
> interesting ideas not so soundly implemented, I do not have much time or
> will to play with th
Dnia 2013-08-01, o godz. 13:32:28
Rich Freeman napisał(a):
> On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> > Dnia 2013-08-01, o godz. 17:17:35
> > Luca Barbato napisał(a):
> >
> >> On 01/08/13 17:04, William Hubbs wrote:
> >> > There is a hack in our udev and kmod ebuilds that makes it
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> Dnia 2013-08-01, o godz. 17:17:35
> Luca Barbato napisał(a):
>
>> On 01/08/13 17:04, William Hubbs wrote:
>> > There is a hack in our udev and kmod ebuilds that makes it possible to
>> > build the static libraries, but I think we should remov
On 01/08/13 17:36, Michał Górny wrote:
> So esystemd and ekmod now?
You know my stance on systemd, for me it is a jumble of bad and
interesting ideas not so soundly implemented, I do not have much time or
will to play with that thing.
kmod on the other hand had a pressing issue and getting it fix
Dnia 2013-08-01, o godz. 17:17:35
Luca Barbato napisał(a):
> On 01/08/13 17:04, William Hubbs wrote:
> > There is a hack in our udev and kmod ebuilds that makes it possible to
> > build the static libraries, but I think we should remove that hack since
> > upstream bans building them.
>
> linkin
On 01/08/13 17:04, William Hubbs wrote:
> There is a hack in our udev and kmod ebuilds that makes it possible to
> build the static libraries, but I think we should remove that hack since
> upstream bans building them.
linking statically makes the problem apparent, I guess isn't that wise
hiding i
On Thu, Aug 01, 2013 at 06:01:50AM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 11:38 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> > If we want to continue supporting this, it will probably require custom
> > patches to udev, and kmod. Then we will have to make sure none of that
> > breaks systemd.
>
> See
> # @ECLASS_VARIABLE: DB_VERSIONS
> # @REQUIRED
> # @DESCRIPTION:
> # This variable contains a list of sys-libs/db SLOT versions the package
> # works with. Please always sort the list so that higher slot versions come
> # first or else the package might not depend on the latest possible version o
Hello,
Since LLVM builds have grown in size lately, I wanted to add some of
check-reqs-r1 checks to it. However, I'm having real trouble guessing
what the correct sizes should be.
Most importantly, as bug #479356 points out, using '-g' greatly
increases the build size. My small measures show that
01.08.2013 01:01, Pacho Ramos пишет:
> El mié, 31-07-2013 a las 19:42 +, Robin H. Johnson escribió:
>> As both a member of base-system, and the lvm2 maintainer, I'm going to
>> go and look at fixing them, because I'd prefer to keep them available as
>> static builds.
>>
>
> But, what is requir
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 11:38 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> If we want to continue supporting this, it will probably require custom
> patches to udev, and kmod. Then we will have to make sure none of that
> breaks systemd.
Seems like the simpler solution is to just have a dep on -static
lvm/cryptset
21 matches
Mail list logo
