I truly appreciate the efforts of everyone on this list who has dedicated so
much time and energy toward providing me with NetBSD and its packaged software.
NetBSD has been good to me. Thank you.
-dgl-
> On Apr 27, 2024, at 2:43 PM, Greg Troxel wrote:
>
> Don Lee writes:
>
>> I have extra s
Havard Eidnes writes:
>> I think I may have struck a nerve.
>
> I'm not sure I understand what that's getting at. It's not a
> particularly "sensitive topic" to me or us in general, I would
> think. The fact that english is a second language for me may
> prevent me from interpreting this commen
> I think I may have struck a nerve.
I'm not sure I understand what that's getting at. It's not a
particularly "sensitive topic" to me or us in general, I would
think. The fact that english is a second language for me may
prevent me from interpreting this comment appropriately.
> The consensus
I think I may have struck a nerve.
The consensus is that 8.2 is very old and I should upgrade.
As a software developer, I understand completely.
As a lowly user, I never want to upgrade *anything* that is working - ever.
(You _never_ trade non-working for working, you trade the old bugs for a n
>> I *believe* I could fix this by upgrading NetBSD to
>> 9.0+. Unfortunately, that would be hard for me, at least now.
>
> Whether there are binary package sets for various versions is a
> question you might want to answer, but in general, you are now
> overdue for an upgrade.
Yep.
> This query
> I have a PPC Mac Mini running NetBSD 8.2. It's stable and
> functional. It serves me well.
Yes, but it's now running an OS which is becoming old and which
is about to be "de-supported" wrt. pkgsrc updates (to the extent
we "support" it). The basic problem is that the supplied
compiler is quite
Sounds like prudent and wise choices/rules.
Mr Nestor has given me a good path for my needs. I’m wondering if I can apply
any of my resources to TNF efforts. I was thinking of setting up a machine
here, but I might do better by simply giving a machine to TNF. (The NetBSD
Foundation?)
NetBSD ha
Wow. Thank you for all the information.
I have extra static IPs, and several PPC Mac mini machines. I wonder how hard
it would be for me to set one up with enough disk space to do bulk builds.
Would that even be helpful? I imagine that to be useful, a machine would have
to have some administrat
Don Lee writes:
> Mr Nestor has given me a good path for my needs. I’m wondering if I
> can apply any of my resources to TNF efforts. I was thinking of
> setting up a machine here, but I might do better by simply giving a
> machine to TNF. (The NetBSD Foundation?)
>
> NetBSD has been good to me.
Don Lee writes:
> I have extra static IPs, and several PPC Mac mini machines. I wonder
> how hard it would be for me to set one up with enough disk space to do
> bulk builds. Would that even be helpful? I imagine that to be useful,
> a machine would have to have some administrative massaging to s
Don Lee writes:
> I have a PPC Mac Mini running NetBSD 8.2. It’s stable and functional. It
> serves me well.
>
> I have been using pkgin to install packages and update them with "pkgin
> upgrade”.
>
> My recent attempts to upgrade have been ended by pkgin telling me:
>
> +mercy$ pkgin upgrade
>
Hi guys,
I have a PPC Mac Mini running NetBSD 8.2. It’s stable and functional. It serves
me well.
I have been using pkgin to install packages and update them with "pkgin
upgrade”.
My recent attempts to upgrade have been ended by pkgin telling me:
+mercy$ pkgin upgrade
calculating dependencies
> The question is, since folks make heavy use of distcc, does it have
the same limitations
I'd expect it to have.
I've not done any compiling in anger with this yet since I want to try
it with multiple helper machines, but will gladly share experiences
when I do so.
You mentioned Firefox an
Swift Griggs writes:
> On Fri, 7 Jul 2017, John Halfpenny wrote:
>> Just an update for posterity that I resolved this issue.
>
> Interesting. The wrapper script idea reminds me of another question
> about distcc and friends. I've noticed that some packages complain
> with great aggrevation about
On Fri, 7 Jul 2017, John Halfpenny wrote:
Just an update for posterity that I resolved this issue.
Interesting. The wrapper script idea reminds me of another question about
distcc and friends. I've noticed that some packages complain with great
aggrevation about my use of "make -jX" where X=C
Just an update for posterity that I resolved this issue.
Following on from my previous email, I included the architecture flag when
building the NetBSD toolchain on Linux (debatable if this alteration was
required):
./build.sh -a i386 -m i386 -T /usr/gcc-cross-i386/ tools
I also included the w
Yeah you're right. I think my debian box isn't using the NetBSD tools.
I'm going to have to make some time to sort that end out properly first,
work out why systemd isn't starting distcc up properly etc.
--
j...@sdf.org
SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.org
On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 07:32:54AM +, John Halfpenny wrote:
> # file test.o
> test.o: ELF 64-bit LSB relocatable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), not stripped
>
I think that's the output it gives for a linux object file. compare:
$ GOOS=linux go build hello.go; file hello
hello: ELF 64-bit LSB
[distcc woes]
[try a simple C program?]
Thanks for taking time to reply, Greg.
I also see the same error as before when adding
USE_CWRAPPERS=no
to mk.conf
But I made a little time to try a simple C program and this has pointed
me in the right direction:
# export DISTCC_HOSTS='de.b
[distcc woes]
Two thoughts:
I have seen problems where distcc does not seem work with cwrappers
enabled. However, I have not gotten around to really figuring this
out. You might try with USE_CWRAPPERS=no.
Have you tried to build a simple C program with distcc, not using
pkgsrc?
Hi all.
I have an old celeron running NetBSD i386 which runs very nicely thankyou. (:
But to save wasting time I'd like to compile pkgsrc programs on a fast,
multicore Linux machine. This machine runs debian (9/x86_64).
Following https://wiki.netbsd.org/tutorials/pkgsrc/cross_compile_distcc/, I
21 matches
Mail list logo
