From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1RfZcp-0000k3-C4 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 27 Dec 2011 16:11:43 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CA9FB21C0E5; Tue, 27 Dec 2011 16:11:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-yx0-f181.google.com (mail-yx0-f181.google.com [209.85.213.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50EA521C06B for ; Tue, 27 Dec 2011 16:10:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: by yenm3 with SMTP id m3so7576322yen.40 for ; Tue, 27 Dec 2011 08:10:11 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Lm6v/ijtUmCvR/GwN4N62dnLw+2zVlhB3N1JdDVh+XI=; b=KCQlaIkp9FbwZl4rnkfNKzuY9m139C1kOmBuKE6xr0cSdOolb9qDLinQqzbAhAjOYG T7U90/PSqbnGbgoHg6dh93qlFLjeyHB1G4iXcudpEyciZoDlt8LBCV/E/R4s1XIpdC0l Rd1ED0GK7COlOlYC0eCDj+H3xT2/zl1/Xds04= Received: by 10.236.140.36 with SMTP id d24mr38323340yhj.84.1325002211795; Tue, 27 Dec 2011 08:10:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.2.5] (adsl-65-0-65-42.jan.bellsouth.net. [65.0.65.42]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id s12sm67554745and.15.2011.12.27.08.10.10 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 27 Dec 2011 08:10:10 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4EF9EDE1.2080504@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 10:10:09 -0600 From: Dale User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20111022 Firefox/7.0.1 SeaMonkey/2.4.1 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Build problems due to invalid libtool arguments References: <4EF8BB9F.1060200@wonkology.org> <20111227080856.GA23625@waltdnes.org> <4EF9D830.9050706@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4EF9D830.9050706@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 19fccaa7-11b5-468f-85db-7a3de54424ee X-Archives-Hash: 5f5d4caad36ea16332a00dacd1ef5f98 Michael Mol wrote: > Walter Dnes wrote: >> On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 07:23:27PM +0100, Alex Schuster wrote >> I notice that you have 'MAKEOPTS="-j4"'. You wouldn't believe how >> many problems you can solve by changing to 'MAKEOPTS="-j1"'. Yes, the >> build process may take a bit longer, but the final executable runs just >> as fast. Change to 'MAKEOPTS="-j1"' and see what happens. >> >> The concept of parallel jobs is nice in theory, and you can *USUALLY* >> get away with it. The problem is that if a job tries to use an >> intermediate file before it's fully created, or if the "destructor" >> (file deletion) does it's thing before the scratch file has been used, >> things get very fouled up. My attitude is that the first time you spend >> hours trying to trace down a non-replicatable bug, you will lose more >> time than you "save" by speeding up builds with 'MAKEOPTS="-j4"'. > > While I agree poking the MAKEOPTS is a good idea, I'd like to point > out my own experience with parallel builds. > > IME, running with emerge "--keep-going", and then running "emerge > --resume --keep-going" once or twice *afterward* typically solves any > problem I had on my first pass. I suspect unspecified dependencies are > usually to blame. > > That's my experience too. It is even rare that I run into that. I would imagine that some builds are more complex than others so if it does fail, trying it with -j1 would make sense. It's better than waiting for a fix that may not happen for a while at least. I think the parallel options on both fronts is getting better. Dale :-) :-) -- I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words! Miss the compile output? Hint: EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--quiet-build=n"