On 14/11/17 19:36, Jorge Almeida wrote:
On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Jorge Almeida wrote:
http://www.daemonology.net/blog/2014-09-04-how-to-zero-a-buffer.html
Of course, what would really solve the optimize-into-oblivion problem
is a pragma that when invoked on a particular block of co
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 12:54 AM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> On 14/11/17 19:36, Jorge Almeida wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Jorge Almeida
>> wrote:
>>
>
> Unless you look at the assembly output, you can't be sure. Some optimization
> is done even at -O0.
>
> I'd stick to using e
On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 18:24:52 GMT Marc Joliet wrote:
> Am Montag, 13. November 2017, 11:59:06 CET schrieb Peter Humphrey:
> > Hello list,
> >
> > I'm hunting a problem with cooling in this box, and I've got as far as
> > suspecting my new AMD WX 5100 GPU.
> >
> > One of my BOINC projects
On 15/11/17 11:05, Jorge Almeida wrote:
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 12:54 AM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
On 14/11/17 19:36, Jorge Almeida wrote:
On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Jorge Almeida
wrote:
Unless you look at the assembly output, you can't be sure. Some optimization
is done even at
On 2017-11-15, R0b0t1 wrote:
> What I am wondering about is if C code which uses
> __attribute__((optimize(...))) is against Gentoo package standards and
> would have to be removed from the Portage tree.
Huh?
Gentoo enforces standards for the source code of packages?
"They" review the source c
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 1:22 AM, Jorge Almeida wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 8:42 PM, R0b0t1 wrote:
>> What I am wondering about is if C code which uses
>> __attribute__((optimize(...))) is against Gentoo package standards and
>> would have to be removed from the Portage tree.
>>
>
>
> You can
Apologies for the double post,
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 9:41 AM, R0b0t1 wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 1:22 AM, Jorge Almeida wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 8:42 PM, R0b0t1 wrote:
>>> What I am wondering about is if C code which uses
>>> __attribute__((optimize(...))) is against Gentoo pack
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 7:41 AM, R0b0t1 wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 1:22 AM, Jorge Almeida wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 8:42 PM, R0b0t1 wrote:
>> You can set your optimization preferences in make.conf, and still an
>> ebuild will override them if deemed unsafe. What would be the
>> di
Hi,
>From emerge I got this """info""":
* Error: The above package list contains packages which cannot be
* installed at the same time on the same system.
(sys-libs/glibc-2.25-r9:2.2/2.2::gentoo, installed) pulled in by
>=sys-libs/glibc-2.23[multilib?] (>=sys-libs/glibc-2.23) required
net-libs/libnsl-1.1.0-r1 is blocking sys-libs/glibc versions lower
than 2.26 and you have sys-libs/glibc-2.25 installed. So try
installing glibc-2.26 manually first and then libnsl.
On 15 November 2017 at 17:50, wrote:
> Hi,
>
> From emerge I got this """info""":
>
>
>
> * Error: The above pack
On 11/15 06:04, Jan Chren (rindeal) wrote:
> net-libs/libnsl-1.1.0-r1 is blocking sys-libs/glibc versions lower
> than 2.26 and you have sys-libs/glibc-2.25 installed. So try
> installing glibc-2.26 manually first and then libnsl.
>
> On 15 November 2017 at 17:50, wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > From eme
Oh, I missed that the current libnsl has a blocker as well. In that
case try to do this:
```
emerge -C libnsl
emerge -1 ">=sys-libs/glibc-2.26"
emerge -1 libnsl
```
On 15 November 2017 at 18:20, wrote:
> On 11/15 06:04, Jan Chren (rindeal) wrote:
>> net-libs/libnsl-1.1.0-r1 is blocking sys-libs
On 11/15/2017 10:50 AM, Jorge Almeida wrote:
>
> Are you really sure? I was under the impression that ebuilds did it,
> and I find that natural. I didn't view that as a bug at all.
On principle, most things in the tree should respect whatever CFLAGS,
LDFLAGS, etc. you ask for. The problems result
On 11/15 06:24, Jan Chren (rindeal) wrote:
> Oh, I missed that the current libnsl has a blocker as well. In that
> case try to do this:
>
> ```
> emerge -C libnsl
> emerge -1 ">=sys-libs/glibc-2.26"
> emerge -1 libnsl
> ```
>
> On 15 November 2017 at 18:20, wrote:
> > On 11/15 06:04, Jan Chren
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 12:20 PM, wrote:
> On 11/15 06:04, Jan Chren (rindeal) wrote:
>> net-libs/libnsl-1.1.0-r1 is blocking sys-libs/glibc versions lower
>> than 2.26 and you have sys-libs/glibc-2.25 installed. So try
>> installing glibc-2.26 manually first and then libnsl.
>>
>> On 15 November
Well, that's yet another problem, this time it's `autofs` package
which depends on glibc having `rpc` USE flag. glibc 2.26 lost this
USE-flag, however. Hopefully you can workaround this by enabling
`libtirpc` USE-flag for `autofs` package.
So the steps should be now:
1. put `net-fs/autofs libtirp
On Wed, 15 Nov 2017 18:43:15 +0100, tu...@posteo.de wrote:
> /root>emerge -1 '>=sys-libs/glibc-2.26'
> Calculating dependencies... done!
> [ebuild U *] sys-libs/glibc- [2.25-r9] USE="-compile-locales%"
>
Why is it trying to install the version? Is that unmasked?
Are you running s
On 2017-11-15, R0b0t1 wrote:
> Apologies for the double post,
>
> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 9:41 AM, R0b0t1 wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 1:22 AM, Jorge Almeida wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 8:42 PM, R0b0t1 wrote:
What I am wondering about is if C code which uses
__attribute__(
Am Mittwoch, 15. November 2017, 17:50:37 CET schrieb tu...@posteo.de:
> * Error: The above package list contains packages which cannot be
> * installed at the same time on the same system.
>
> (sys-libs/glibc-2.25-r9:2.2/2.2::gentoo, installed) pulled in by
>
> >=sys-libs/glibc-2.23[mult
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 3:42 PM, Grant Edwards
wrote:
> On 2017-11-15, R0b0t1 wrote:
>> Apologies for the double post,
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 9:41 AM, R0b0t1 wrote:
>>> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 1:22 AM, Jorge Almeida wrote:
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 8:42 PM, R0b0t1 wrote:
> What I
On 2017-11-15 18:40, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> Why is it trying to install the version? Is that unmasked?
>
> Are you running stable or testing?
>
> What does "grep -r glibc /etc/portage" say?
>
> I don't think you posted the command that started all of this?
For some reason, these horrible
On 11/15 05:49, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
> On 2017-11-15 18:40, Neil Bothwick wrote:
>
> > Why is it trying to install the version? Is that unmasked?
> >
> > Are you running stable or testing?
> >
> > What does "grep -r glibc /etc/portage" say?
> >
> > I don't think you posted the command that
On 16/11/17 11:05, tu...@posteo.de wrote:
> Hi,
>
> building firefox 57.0 failed on my system - it looks like
> the last stage (linking) fails.
>
> I attached the build.log to this mail.
>
> Is there a way around this?
>
> Cheers
> Meino
>
First thing I do when I have a problem with
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 4:05 AM, wrote:
> Hi,
>
> building firefox 57.0 failed on my system - it looks like
> the last stage (linking) fails.
>
It doesn't fail at the last stage - that's just when the error is
repeated after other parallel tasks in the pipeline are completed. The
actual error yo
>
> thread '' panicked at 'Unable to find libclang: "the
> `libclang` shared library could not be opened:
> /usr/lib64/llvm/5/lib64/libclang.so.5.0"', src/libcore/result.rs:860
> stack backtrace:
>
> Short of the file missing, no idea what could be the root cause.
>
>
Given this, you may as well se
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 08:15:18AM +0100, Jeremi Piotrowski wrote:
It doesn't fail at the last stage - that's just when the error is
repeated after other parallel tasks in the pipeline are completed. The
actual error you got starts around line 5520 and is:
--- stderr
thread '' panicked at 'Unabl
26 matches
Mail list logo
