From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CC9E1381F3 for ; Mon, 13 May 2013 13:05:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 321D5E0B0B; Mon, 13 May 2013 13:05:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtpq2.gn.mail.iss.as9143.net (smtpq2.gn.mail.iss.as9143.net [212.54.34.165]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F13FCE0AD0 for ; Mon, 13 May 2013 13:05:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [212.54.34.135] (helo=smtp4.gn.mail.iss.as9143.net) by smtpq2.gn.mail.iss.as9143.net with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UbsRS-0006PV-E2 for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 13 May 2013 15:05:26 +0200 Received: from 54698b76.cm-12-2c.dynamic.ziggo.nl ([84.105.139.118] helo=data.antarean.org) by smtp4.gn.mail.iss.as9143.net with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UbsRR-0000Hd-Sa for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 13 May 2013 15:05:26 +0200 Received: from www.antarean.org (net.lan.antarean.org [10.20.13.13]) by data.antarean.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D8934B for ; Mon, 13 May 2013 15:04:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from 212.159.196.72 (SquirrelMail authenticated user joost) by www.antarean.org with HTTP; Mon, 13 May 2013 15:05:24 +0200 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <5190D1E0.6060601@gmail.com> References: <519006A0.2080807@gmail.com> <51900954.9050002@gmail.com> <51900F4D.2060907@gmail.com> <51908ECA.4020101@gmail.com> <5190AACE.2090205@gmail.com> <5190C0B6.1030300@gmail.com> <5190CB80.8050801@gmail.com> <283b682f57dec88de456c11f5666ac6c.squirrel@www.antarean.org> <5190D1E0.6060601@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 15:05:24 +0200 Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Gcc compiling, is this normal? From: "J. Roeleveld" To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.22 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 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Ziggo-spambar: - X-Ziggo-spamscore: -1.3 X-Ziggo-spamreport: BAYES_00=-1.9,RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.982,RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.628,TW_JP=0.077,TW_VJ=0.077,TW_XV=0.077 X-Ziggo-Spam-Status: No X-Spam-Status: No X-Spam-Flag: No X-Archives-Salt: e7b0842b-e67c-44f4-88f3-547ec4f73d6a X-Archives-Hash: 471f94217cfe0e7158e16e21c22b8177 On Mon, May 13, 2013 13:43, Dale wrote: > J. Roeleveld wrote: >> I try to keep the USE-flags out of make.conf as much as possible. >> Some packages have "multislot" where I don't necessarily want it >> enabled. > > It turned into a USE flag nightmare so I used package.use. Sometimes i= t > just don't work out since a few packages gets into a world class > wrestling match. I usually try but don't sweat it. My make.conf USE-variable is really small, it's all in package.use/... :) >> Well, after waiting for it to finish, I get this now: >> >> root@fireball / # genlop -c >> >> Currently merging 4 out of 4 >> >> * sys-devel/gcc-4.4.7 >> >> current merge time: 6 minutes and 57 seconds. >> ETA: 17 minutes and 2 seconds. >> >> Currently merging 4 out of 4 >> >> * sys-devel/gcc-4.4.7 >> >> current merge time: 6 minutes and 58 seconds. >> ETA: 17 minutes and 1 second. >> root@fireball / # >> >> So there it is compiling the same package version twice, again. Going >> to kill it since it will sit there and compile for hours if I don't. = I >> also found out I am not the only one having issues doing a ctrl c to >> stop emerge too. They need some Raid on that problem. >> >> Open to new ideas. >> Just a quick question, are you certain it is doing both simultaneously= ? >> It could also be a bug in genlop? >> >> I always generate the binary packages, which means I don't actually ne= ed >> to keep older GCC-versions. I can always unpack the package using "tar= " >> :) >> >> -- >> Joost >> >> >> > > I have it set to save a tarball here but I'd have to look up how to > rescue myself if I did screw up. To rescue yourself using a binpackage: # cd / # tar -xvjpf <...path-to-binpackage-including-package...> After that, I would suggest a "emerge -vek world" :) > To answer your question, I decided to > just let the stupid thing sit there and compile. After a while, I got > this: > > root@fireball / # genlop -c > > Currently merging 4 out of 4 > > * sys-devel/gcc-4.4.7 > > current merge time: 25 minutes and 17 seconds. > ETA: any time now. > root@fireball / # > > So, one of the compiles finished. That is a improvement at least. I > just checked again and it is finished with them all and I got this for > the end of emerge: > > Total: 4 packages (1 upgrade, 3 reinstalls), Size of downloads: 24 kB > > Would you like to merge these packages? [Yes/No] y > I'm going to say this tho, it did not have time to compile the last gcc > even tho I'm sure it did. Your mention of a genlop error may be right. > I bet genlop is reporting the wrong version on one of them somehow. I wonder if "genlop" is noticing there are 2 GCC-compiles running, but picks the most current version for both, rather then the correct version for each emerge? > To add this in case I didn't mention it. One time before, gcc compiled > for like 5 or 6 hours while I took a nap. I can compile LOo several > times in that time frame. Gcc never takes more than 30 minutes or so, > usually around 20 or so. That depends on the USE-flags, I think. GCC on my old system always took a while, new systems (with also new versions) seem to be a lot faster. Thing is, I tend to build packages for all the machines in a single VM an= d then install those when I have a current set. That VM tends to be started and then I just leave it till I come back fro= m work the next day. > I have a 4 core CPU running at I think 3.2Ghz > and 16Gbs of ram with portages work directory on tmpfs. > > This is weird. May look into a genlop change, up to a unstable one or > back to a older version. See if that helps. Got to figure out how to > force a upgrade tho. ;-) > > Thanks. At least I seem to have a clean upgrade now. You might already had :) -- Joost