---
crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 1:49 PM Ivo De Decker wrote:
>
> Hi Aurelien,
>
> On 8/8/19 10:38 PM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>
> > 32-bit processes are able to address at maximum 4GB of memory (2^32),
> > and often less (2 or 3GB)
---
crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 9:39 PM Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> We are at a point were we should probably look for a real solution
> instead of relying on tricks.
*sigh* i _have_ been pointing out for several years now that thi
On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 5:13 PM Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > a proper fix would also have the advantage of keeping linkers for
> > *other* platforms (even 64 bit ones) out of swap-thrashing, saving
> > power consumption for build hardware and costing a lot less on SSD and
> > HDD regular replacement
On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 7:29 PM Sam Hartman wrote:
> Your entire argument is built on the premise that it is actually
> desirable for these applications (compilers, linkers, etc) to work in
> 32-bit address spaces.
that's right [and in another message in the thread it was mentioned
that builds h
On Sun, Jan 6, 2019 at 11:46 PM Steve McIntyre wrote:
>
> [ Please note the cross-post and respect the Reply-To... ]
>
> Hi folks,
>
> This has taken a while in coming, for which I apologise. There's a lot
> of work involved in rebuilding the whole Debian archive, and many many
> hours spent analy
On Tuesday, January 8, 2019, Mike Hommey wrote:
> .
>
> Note that Firefox is built with --no-keep-memory
> --reduce-memory-overheads, and that was still not enough for 32-bts
> builds. GNU gold instead of BFD ld was also given a shot. That didn't
> work either. Presently, to make things link at a
On Tuesday, January 8, 2019, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 11:46:41PM +0000, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
> wrote:
>
> > At some point apps are going to become so insanely large that not even
> > disabling debug info will help.
>
> That's less
$ python evil_linker_torture.py 2000 50 100 200
ok so it's pretty basic, and arguments of "2000 50 10 100"
resulted in around a 10-15 second linker phase, which top showed to be
getting up to around the 2-3GB resident memory range. "2000 50 100
200" should start to make even a system
On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 6:27 AM Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
wrote:
> i'm just running the above, will hit "send" now in case i can't hit
> ctrl-c in time on the linker phase... goodbye world... :)
$ python evil_linker_torture.py 2000 50 100 200
$ make -j8
oh,
$ python evil_linker_torture.py 3000 100 100 50
ok so that managed to get up to 1.8GB resident memory, paused for a
bit, then doubled it to 3.6GB, and a few seconds later successfully
outputted a binary.
i'm going to see if i can get above the 4GB mark by modifying the
Makefile to do 3,000 sh
On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 7:01 AM Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
wrote:
> i'm going to see if i can get above the 4GB mark by modifying the
> Makefile to do 3,000 shared libraries instead of 3,000 static object
> files.
fail. shared libraries link extremely quickly. reverted to
On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 7:26 AM Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 7:01 AM Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
> wrote:
> trying this:
>
> $ python evil_linker_torture.py 3000 400 200 50
>
> running with "make -j4" is going to take a few
On Thursday, May 17, 2012, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 09:18:38PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
>
> >> >Would it be worth trying to link with gold for these?
> >>
> >> It might be, yes. I can try that with iceweasel on an imx53 or Panda
> >> with 1GB if you like. Are there any non
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 8:16 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 08:03:00PM +, Niels Thykier wrote:
>> armel/armhf:
>>
>>
>> * Undesirable to keep the hardware running beyond 2020. armhf VM
>>support uncertain. (DSA)
>>- Source: [DSA Sprint
On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 9:03 PM, Niels Thykier wrote:
> armel/armhf:
>
>
> * Undesirable to keep the hardware running beyond 2020. armhf VM
>support uncertain. (DSA)
>- Source: [DSA Sprint report]
[other affected 32-bit architectures removed but still relevant]
... i'm
---
crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 10:35 AM, Adam D. Barratt
wrote:
>> what is the reason why that package is not moving forward?
>
> I assume you're referring to the dpkg upload that's in proposed-updates
> waiting for the point
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 12:23 PM, Adam D. Barratt
wrote:
>> i don't know: i'm an outsider who doesn't have the information in
>> short-term memory, which is why i cc'd the debian-riscv team as they
>> have current facts and knowledge foremost in their minds. which is
>> why i included them.
>
>
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 12:06 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
wrote:
> On 06/29/2018 10:41 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 8:16 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
>> wrote:
>>
>>>> In short, the hardware (development boards) we're current
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 12:50 PM, Julien Cristau wrote:
> Everyone, please avoid followups to debian-po...@lists.debian.org.
> Unless something is relevant to *all* architectures (hint: discussion of
> riscv or arm issues don't qualify), keep replies to the appropriate
> port-specific mailing lis
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 3:28 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Roger Shimizu, le ven. 29 juin 2018 23:04:26 +0900, a ecrit:
>> On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 10:04 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
>> wrote:
>> > On 06/29/2018 11:23 AM, Julien Cristau wrote:
>> >> 2G is also way too little memory these days for a new bu
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 5:21 PM, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>>2G is also way too little memory these days for a new buildd.
>
> Nod - lots of packages are just too big for that now.
apologies for repeating it again: this is why i'm recommending people
try "-Wl,--no-keep-memory" on the linker phase a
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 6:59 PM, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
>> also worth noting, they're working on a 2U rackmount server which
>> will have i think something insane like 48 Rock64Pro boards in one
>> full-length case.
> None of this addresses the basic DSA requirement of remote management.
> T
---
crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 8:31 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton:
>
>> that is not a surprise to hear: the massive thrashing caused by the
>> linker phase not being possible
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 8:13 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 6:59 PM, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
>
>>> also worth noting, they're working on a 2U rackmount server which
>>> will have i think something insane like 48 Rock64Pro board
spoke again to TL and asked if pine64 would be willing to look at
sponsorship witn rockpro64 boards (the ones that take 4x PCIe): if
someone from debian were to contact him direct he would happily
consider it.
i then asked him if i could cc him into this discussion and he said he
was way *way* too
On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 04:17:10PM -0700, Matt Taggart wrote:
> debian-release cc'd due to minimum system requirement stuff mentioned in a
> previous message...
>
> Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton writes...
>
> > my bug report invites you to consider the impact that s
On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 03:51:22PM -0700, Matt Taggart wrote:
> It would probably be a good idea to record what ought to work in any given
> release and maybe have an ongoing idea what it should be. The answer might be
> architecture specific? ISTR either the d-i team or apt/dpkg/aptitude tryin
On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 05:06:49PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Incidentally, I have no idea why this bug was filed against
> kernel-image-2.6-686;
... because i believed it to be a... wossisname... dummy package
(2.6.N ... 2.6.NN)
oops.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wit
On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 05:52:54PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 12:45:48AM +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 03:51:22PM -0700, Matt Taggart wrote:
>
> > for this P120 (whatever) i have *shudder* had to use a
>
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 10:54 PM, Adam D. Barratt
wrote:
> (fwiw, the not-yet-built list includes webkit and ruby1.9.1, each of
> which have a number of other packages directly or indirectly stuck
> behind them).
ahh... webkit. do you have a system anywhere that has 2gb of RAM?
if not, i strong
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 11:04 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
wrote:
> anything outside of that - even by a marginal amount - will result in
> the build machine absolutely thrashing its nuts off.
[for anything in excess of 24 hours].
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-releas
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 12:24 AM, peter green wrote:
> Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 10:54 PM, Adam D. Barratt
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> (fwiw, the not-yet-built list includes webkit and ruby1.9.1, each of
&g
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 3:52 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> The 3.8.y branch is over, so I think we have to move to 3.9, ready or
> not. I merged the work in progress from trunk to sid and am going
> through the config changes at the moment.
>
> I'm rather disappointed that nothing at all has been c
33 matches
Mail list logo
