View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
evoweiss Veteran
Joined: 07 Sep 2003 Posts: 1678 Location: Edinburgh, UK
|
Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2011 9:35 am Post subject: Firefox 7.0.1-r1 fails to emerge [solved] |
|
|
Hi,
There appears to be a problem in emerging Firefox 7.0.1-r1. I've tried doing so twice already: the first time X/KDE was up and running and the second time I shutdown X/KDE, i.e., in the console. Still, the same problem happens. I have very sane gcc flags, so I don't think it's that.
My emerge output is as follows:
Code: |
/usr/bin/python2.7 /var/tmp/portage/www-client/firefox-7.0.1-r1/work/mozilla-release/config/pythonpath.py -I../../config /var/tmp/portage/www-client/firefox-7.0.1-r1/work/mozilla-release/config/expandlibs_e$
collect2: ld terminated with signal 9 [Killed]
make[5]: *** [libxul.so] Error 1
make[5]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/www-client/firefox-7.0.1-r1/work/mozilla-release/obj-i686-pc-linux-gnu/toolkit/library'
make[4]: *** [libs_tier_platform] Error 2
make[4]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/www-client/firefox-7.0.1-r1/work/mozilla-release/obj-i686-pc-linux-gnu'
make[3]: *** [tier_platform] Error 2
make[3]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/www-client/firefox-7.0.1-r1/work/mozilla-release/obj-i686-pc-linux-gnu'
make[2]: *** [default] Error 2
make[2]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/www-client/firefox-7.0.1-r1/work/mozilla-release/obj-i686-pc-linux-gnu'
make[1]: *** [realbuild] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/www-client/firefox-7.0.1-r1/work/mozilla-release'
make: *** [build] Error 2
emake failed
^[[31;01m*^[[0m ERROR: www-client/firefox-7.0.1-r1 failed (compile phase):
^[[31;01m*^[[0m emake failed
^[[31;01m*^[[0m
^[[31;01m*^[[0m Call stack:
^[[31;01m*^[[0m ebuild.sh, line 56: Called src_compile
^[[31;01m*^[[0m environment, line 6659: Called die
^[[31;01m*^[[0m The specific snippet of code:
^[[31;01m*^[[0m CC="$(tc-getCC)" CXX="$(tc-getCXX)" LD="$(tc-getLD)" MOZ_MAKE_FLAGS="${MAKEOPTS}" emake -f client.mk || die "emake failed";
^[[31;01m*^[[0m
^[[31;01m*^[[0m If you need support, post the output of 'emerge --info =www-client/firefox-7.0.1-r1',
^[[31;01m*^[[0m the complete build log and the output of 'emerge -pqv =www-client/firefox-7.0.1-r1'.
^[[31;01m*^[[0m The complete build log is located at '/var/tmp/portage/www-client/firefox-7.0.1-r1/temp/build.log'.
^[[31;01m*^[[0m The ebuild environment file is located at '/var/tmp/portage/www-client/firefox-7.0.1-r1/temp/environment'.
^[[31;01m*^[[0m S: '/var/tmp/portage/www-client/firefox-7.0.1-r1/work/mozilla-release'
|
dmesg seems to suggest that I ran out of memory, though I have 512 megs and have never had problems compiling Firefox in the past.
Code: |
emerge invoked oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x201da, order=0, oom_adj=0, oom_score_adj=0
Pid: 27951, comm: emerge Tainted: P 3.0.6-gentoo #1
Call Trace:
[<c1061b65>] ? dump_header.clone.8+0x53/0x14f
[<c113c3ce>] ? ___ratelimit+0xa6/0xb8
[<c1061d62>] ? oom_kill_process.clone.11+0x24/0x1dd
[<c102ce81>] ? has_capability_noaudit+0x15/0x1d
[<c1062225>] ? out_of_memory+0x20a/0x267
[<c1064b6a>] ? __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x467/0x4fa
[<c1061417>] ? filemap_fault+0x234/0x30e
[<c1070a8a>] ? __do_fault+0x40/0x314
[<c1072c71>] ? handle_pte_fault+0x240/0x517
[<c107300b>] ? handle_mm_fault+0xc3/0xd5
[<c1018ae1>] ? do_page_fault+0x310/0x32f
[<c108ff43>] ? sys_poll+0x3c/0x83
[<c10187d1>] ? vmalloc_sync_all+0xc2/0xc2
[<c129c712>] ? error_code+0x5a/0x60
[<c10187d1>] ? vmalloc_sync_all+0xc2/0xc2
Mem-Info:
DMA per-cpu:
CPU 0: hi: 0, btch: 1 usd: 0
CPU 1: hi: 0, btch: 1 usd: 0
Normal per-cpu:
CPU 0: hi: 186, btch: 31 usd: 30
CPU 1: hi: 186, btch: 31 usd: 2
active_anon:60716 inactive_anon:60775 isolated_anon:0
active_file:77 inactive_file:101 isolated_file:0
unevictable:0 dirty:0 writeback:0 unstable:0
free:1184 slab_reclaimable:911 slab_unreclaimable:1850
mapped:7 shmem:0 pagetables:483 bounce:0
DMA free:2056kB min:84kB low:104kB high:124kB active_anon:6548kB inactive_anon:6736kB active_file:4kB inactive_file:0kB unevictable:0kB isolated(anon):0kB isolated(file):0kB present:15808kB mlocked:0kB dirty:0kB writeback:0kB mapped:4kB shmem:0kB slab_reclaimable:80kB slab_unreclaimable:296kB kernel_stack:72kB pagetables:120kB unstable:0kB bounce:0kB writeback_tmp:0kB pages_scanned:17 all_unreclaimable? yes
lowmem_reserve[]: 0 491 491 491
Normal free:2680kB min:2792kB low:3488kB high:4188kB active_anon:236316kB inactive_anon:236364kB active_file:304kB inactive_file:404kB unevictable:0kB isolated(anon):0kB isolated(file):0kB present:503380kB mlocked:0kB dirty:0kB writeback:0kB mapped:24kB shmem:0kB slab_reclaimable:3564kB slab_unreclaimable:7104kB kernel_stack:1160kB pagetables:1812kB unstable:0kB bounce:0kB writeback_tmp:0kB pages_scanned:1167 all_unreclaimable? yes
lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0 0
DMA: 2*4kB 236*8kB 10*16kB 0*32kB 0*64kB 0*128kB 0*256kB 0*512kB 0*1024kB 0*2048kB 0*4096kB = 2056kB
Normal: 670*4kB 0*8kB 0*16kB 0*32kB 0*64kB 0*128kB 0*256kB 0*512kB 0*1024kB 0*2048kB 0*4096kB = 2680kB
4836 total pagecache pages
4632 pages in swap cache
Swap cache stats: add 1778212, delete 1773580, find 677994/814041
Free swap = 0kB
Total swap = 506040kB
130916 pages RAM
0 pages HighMem
2318 pages reserved
155 pages shared
126884 pages non-shared
[ pid ] uid tgid total_vm rss cpu oom_adj oom_score_adj name
[ 694] 0 694 601 0 1 -17 -1000 udevd
[ 1351] 101 1351 742 0 0 0 0 dbus-daemon
[ 1364] 0 1364 515 19 1 0 0 metalog
[ 1365] 0 1365 508 0 0 0 0 metalog
[ 1378] 0 1378 6715 0 0 0 0 console-kit-dae
[ 1525] 0 1525 5724 0 1 0 0 polkitd
[ 1549] 0 1549 494 0 1 0 0 dhcpcd
[ 1642] 104 1642 2798 270 0 0 0 ddclient
[ 1726] 0 1726 889 21 0 0 0 master
[ 1731] 207 1731 1548 20 0 0 0 qmgr
[ 1741] 103 1741 1508 93 0 0 0 fetchmail
[ 1766] 0 1766 1109 15 0 0 0 ntpd
[ 1785] 0 1785 1449 3 0 -17 -1000 sshd
[ 1812] 0 1812 952 9 0 0 0 cron
[ 1827] 0 1827 457 1 0 0 0 agetty
[ 1828] 0 1828 457 1 0 0 0 agetty
[ 1829] 0 1829 457 1 1 0 0 agetty
[ 1830] 0 1830 457 1 1 0 0 agetty
[ 1831] 0 1831 457 1 0 0 0 agetty
[ 6363] 0 6363 3422 0 1 0 0 upowerd
[ 6390] 0 6390 3653 1 1 0 0 udisks-daemon
[ 6392] 0 6392 1285 14 0 0 0 udisks-daemon
[16123] 1000 16123 1508 97 0 0 0 fetchmail
[27923] 0 27923 600 0 0 -17 -1000 udevd
[27938] 0 27938 1182 1 0 0 0 screen
[27939] 0 27939 1227 1 0 0 0 bash
[27951] 0 27951 16497 88 0 0 0 emerge
[30745] 0 30745 448 0 1 0 0 sandbox
[30746] 0 30746 1730 1 1 0 0 ebuild.sh
[30768] 0 30768 2321 1 0 0 0 ebuild.sh
[30781] 0 30781 921 1 0 0 0 emake
[30786] 0 30786 694 0 1 0 0 make
[31073] 0 31073 757 1 1 0 0 make
[ 6506] 0 6506 745 0 0 0 0 make
[ 7291] 0 7291 729 0 1 0 0 make
[12916] 0 12916 831 0 0 0 0 make
[15915] 0 15915 457 1 1 0 0 agetty
[23807] 0 23807 2095 0 0 0 0 sshd
[23815] 1000 23815 2134 0 1 0 0 sshd
[23816] 1000 23816 1226 1 0 0 0 bash
[24473] 0 24473 1098 0 0 0 0 su
[24478] 0 24478 1226 0 0 0 0 bash
[24485] 0 24485 1149 8 0 0 0 screen
[25534] 207 25534 1512 12 0 0 0 pickup
[27861] 0 27861 764 1 0 0 0 make
[27880] 0 27880 2117 1 1 0 0 python2.7
[27881] 0 27881 642 0 0 0 0 i686-pc-linux-g
[27882] 0 27882 613 0 1 0 0 collect2
[27883] 0 27883 222491 116176 0 0 0 ld
Out of memory: Kill process 27883 (ld) score 839 or sacrifice child
Killed process 27883 (ld) total-vm:889964kB, anon-rss:464704kB, file-rss:0kB
|
Any thoughts on how to overcome this?
Best,
Alex
Last edited by evoweiss on Tue Nov 15, 2011 9:44 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Chiitoo Administrator
Joined: 28 Feb 2010 Posts: 2573 Location: Here and Away Again
|
Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2011 10:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
Which versions of Firefox have you been compiling in the past?
At some point, can't remember right now at which version, I think it changed quite a bit so that it can indeed take a lot of memory. Even with 2 GiB of RAM I would get slowdowns (it used it all and started swapping, too), at least I think it was Firefox, but for me it was temporary anyways because I had went down from 4 GiB to 2 due to the other stick failing and now I'm at 12...or wait, 8 right now.
Either way, what is your MAKEOPTS="-j" set to? I could reduce the amount or memory used by big compilations by reducing mine from 7 to 4 to have it go through nicely. There are other methods of reducing the RAM use but they do escape me at this time, and I would need to go look for certain threads for them, I'm sure someone has some ideas to share before I find them.
Another thing would be increasing the swap size, if possible, since if I am reading it right, it was using it all there... _________________ Kindest of regardses. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
evoweiss Veteran
Joined: 07 Sep 2003 Posts: 1678 Location: Edinburgh, UK
|
Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2011 11:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Chiitoo wrote: | Which versions of Firefox have you been compiling in the past? |
My previous version of Firefox was 3.6.20, i.e., I was all up-to-date.
Chiitoo wrote: | Either way, what is your MAKEOPTS="-j" set to? I could reduce the amount or memory used by big compilations by reducing mine from 7 to 4 to have it go through nicely. There are other methods of reducing the RAM use but they do escape me at this time, and I would need to go look for certain threads for them, I'm sure someone has some ideas to share before I find them. |
MAKEOPTS="-j" is set to 3.
Chiitoo wrote: | Another thing would be increasing the swap size, if possible, since if I am reading it right, it was using it all there... |
Unfortunately, I cannot change the size of my swap partition as I set up my system long before that was an easy thing to do.
Best,
Alex |
|
Back to top |
|
|
John R. Graham Administrator
Joined: 08 Mar 2005 Posts: 10589 Location: Somewhere over Atlanta, Georgia
|
Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2011 11:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
What is your swap space size? Lowering the MAKEOPTS value is definitely the first thing to try.
- John _________________ I can confirm that I have received between 0 and 499 National Security Letters. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
evoweiss Veteran
Joined: 07 Sep 2003 Posts: 1678 Location: Edinburgh, UK
|
Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2011 11:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi there,
John R. Graham wrote: | What is your swap space size? |
Filename Type Size Used Priority
/dev/sda2 partition 506040 14140 -1
Quote: | Lowering the MAKEOPTS value is definitely the first thing to try. |
Lower than it already is, i.e., 3?
Best,
Alex |
|
Back to top |
|
|
John R. Graham Administrator
Joined: 08 Mar 2005 Posts: 10589 Location: Somewhere over Atlanta, Georgia
|
Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2011 12:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, even lower: try "-j1". Also try removing "-pipe" from your CFLAGS. Just to make sure I'm interpreting your swap space number correctly, could you post the output ofplease?
- John _________________ I can confirm that I have received between 0 and 499 National Security Letters. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
evoweiss Veteran
Joined: 07 Sep 2003 Posts: 1678 Location: Edinburgh, UK
|
Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2011 12:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
John R. Graham wrote: | Yes, even lower: try "-j1". Also try removing "-pipe" from your CFLAGS. Just to make sure I'm interpreting your swap space number correctly, could you post the output ofplease? |
Okay, I'll try j1 (I don't have -pipe in my CFLAGS in the first place).
Output of /proc/meminfo is:
Code: |
MemTotal: 514392 kB
MemFree: 168240 kB
Buffers: 75460 kB
Cached: 215080 kB
SwapCached: 1972 kB
Active: 111868 kB
Inactive: 186084 kB
Active(anon): 2804 kB
Inactive(anon): 4628 kB
Active(file): 109064 kB
Inactive(file): 181456 kB
Unevictable: 0 kB
Mlocked: 0 kB
HighTotal: 0 kB
HighFree: 0 kB
LowTotal: 514392 kB
LowFree: 168240 kB
SwapTotal: 506040 kB
SwapFree: 495000 kB
Dirty: 5388 kB
Writeback: 0 kB
AnonPages: 6692 kB
Mapped: 5308 kB
Shmem: 8 kB
Slab: 36368 kB
SReclaimable: 27212 kB
SUnreclaim: 9156 kB
KernelStack: 1152 kB
PageTables: 820 kB
NFS_Unstable: 0 kB
Bounce: 0 kB
WritebackTmp: 0 kB
CommitLimit: 763236 kB
Committed_AS: 86804 kB
VmallocTotal: 508456 kB
VmallocUsed: 7324 kB
VmallocChunk: 492960 kB
HugePages_Total: 0
HugePages_Free: 0
HugePages_Rsvd: 0
HugePages_Surp: 0
Hugepagesize: 4096 kB
DirectMap4k: 81360 kB
DirectMap4M: 442368 kB
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
evoweiss Veteran
Joined: 07 Sep 2003 Posts: 1678 Location: Edinburgh, UK
|
Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2011 2:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi,
Using -j1 did not do the trick. Again, the emerge failed. Any other recommendations?
Best,
Alex |
|
Back to top |
|
|
John R. Graham Administrator
Joined: 08 Mar 2005 Posts: 10589 Location: Somewhere over Atlanta, Georgia
|
Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2011 3:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You're going to have to deal with your swap space. With only half a gig, it's just inadequate. What filesystems do you use? (I ask this so I can propose tools to move and resize your partitions.)
- John _________________ I can confirm that I have received between 0 and 499 National Security Letters. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
evoweiss Veteran
Joined: 07 Sep 2003 Posts: 1678 Location: Edinburgh, UK
|
Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2011 4:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi there,
John R. Graham wrote: | You're going to have to deal with your swap space. With only half a gig, it's just inadequate. What filesystems do you use? (I ask this so I can propose tools to move and resize your partitions.) |
I posted a reply earlier, but think it was incorrect. The file system appears to be tmpfs, though here's the result of df -T /dev/sda2
Code: |
udev tmpfs 10240 184 10056 2% /dev
|
My fstab is:
Code: | # NOTE: If your BOOT partition is ReiserFS, add the notail option to opts.
/dev/sda1 /boot ext3 noauto,noatime $
/dev/sda3 / ext3 noatime $
/dev/sda2 none swap sw $
/dev/sdb1 /mnt/hdb1 ext3 noatime $
/dev/sr0 /mnt/cdrom auto noauto,ro,user $
/dev/sr1 /mnt/cdrom1 auto noauto,ro,user |
Best,
Alex |
|
Back to top |
|
|
John R. Graham Administrator
Joined: 08 Mar 2005 Posts: 10589 Location: Somewhere over Atlanta, Georgia
|
Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2011 4:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Just to be clear, the error message you typically get when you run out of tmpfs is the abstruse "Bus error". Are you getting that? If not, then we're on the right track with working on increasing the size of your swap space.
- John _________________ I can confirm that I have received between 0 and 499 National Security Letters. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
evoweiss Veteran
Joined: 07 Sep 2003 Posts: 1678 Location: Edinburgh, UK
|
Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2011 4:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi,
John R. Graham wrote: | Just to be clear, the error message you typically get when you run out of tmpfs is the abstruse "Bus error". Are you getting that? If not, then we're on the right track with working on increasing the size of your swap space. |
I found no reference to "Bus error" within my dmesg output.
Best,
Alex |
|
Back to top |
|
|
John R. Graham Administrator
Joined: 08 Mar 2005 Posts: 10589 Location: Somewhere over Atlanta, Georgia
|
Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2011 4:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I believe it'll be in the /var/log/portage output for the failed ebuild. Check there too.
- John _________________ I can confirm that I have received between 0 and 499 National Security Letters. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
evoweiss Veteran
Joined: 07 Sep 2003 Posts: 1678 Location: Edinburgh, UK
|
Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2011 4:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
John R. Graham wrote: | I believe it'll be in the /var/log/portage output for the failed ebuild. Check there too. |
I am presently trying one other approach that I saw noted online. It seems to have overwritten what was in the log already. If this works, I'll post that, though, if not, I'll let you know if there is a "bus error".
Best,
Alex |
|
Back to top |
|
|
nlsa8z6zoz7lyih3ap Guru
Joined: 25 Sep 2007 Posts: 388 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2011 4:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: | Unfortunately, I cannot change the size of my swap partition as I set up my system long before that was an easy thing to do. |
You can easily set up an extra swap using a swapfile rather than a partition.
I do this when compiling libreoffice.
Say that you want to add 5GB of swap space.
(1) dd if=/dev/zero of=/swapfile bs=1024k count=5000
(2) mkswap /swapfile
(3) swapon /swapfile
Of course in (1), swapfile can include a path to any mounted partition that is big enough to hold it.
Now give the command swapon -s to check that you have been successful
After the next reboot you can simply rm /swapfile to get rid of it.
Hope that this helps. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
evoweiss Veteran
Joined: 07 Sep 2003 Posts: 1678 Location: Edinburgh, UK
|
Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2011 8:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
nlsa8z6zoz7lyih3ap wrote: | You can easily set up an extra swap using a swapfile rather than a partition. |
I'll give that a try and will report back. Thanks.
Best,
Alex |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Aiken Apprentice
Joined: 22 Jan 2003 Posts: 239 Location: Toowoomba/Australia
|
Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2011 10:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
For sane values of X, playing with make -jX should not make a lot of difference. The problem is how much ram the linking part of build takes. Ld uses a lot of ram when linking firefox and thunderbird.
2GHz laptop with 1 gig of ram and 2.5 gig of swap. Building firefox and watching top. I went and did other things after top was reporting VIRT/RES 1007/779 for ld with 784 meg of swap in use and no end in sight. The hd light is on permanently and ld was hitting an amazing 3% cpu with the other 97% waiting on io.
After 81 minutes it finally finished. Largest amount of swap used was 939 meg. I can not see that working with a system that has 512 meg + 512 meg of swap. _________________ Beware the grue. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Chiitoo Administrator
Joined: 28 Feb 2010 Posts: 2573 Location: Here and Away Again
|
Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2011 2:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah, I think 3.6 or so (stable anyways) was around the last 'small' compile job for it if I remember right.
I'm quite confident that once you get some more of either RAM or/and SWAP you'll be fine. ^^ _________________ Kindest of regardses. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
evoweiss Veteran
Joined: 07 Sep 2003 Posts: 1678 Location: Edinburgh, UK
|
Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2011 9:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi all,
Chiitoo wrote: | Yeah, I think 3.6 or so (stable anyways) was around the last 'small' compile job for it if I remember right.
I'm quite confident that once you get some more of either RAM or/and SWAP you'll be fine. ^^ |
Looks like that did the trick. It's an older machine (Dell 8300) so I may be able to get cheap memory. The machine runs fine, so I'd rather not get a new machine until this one permanently gives up the ghost or I see some fantastic bargain and feel like spending the cash on it.
Best,
Alex |
|
Back to top |
|
|
eccerr0r Watchman
Joined: 01 Jul 2004 Posts: 9679 Location: almost Mile High in the USA
|
Posted: Mon Nov 21, 2011 8:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
I had a similar issue and found that one needs about 1.5GB of virtual (physical + swap) RAM to complete building firefox7 - all due to the link stage at the end where it links all the compiled binaries together. To get to the fail state faster, I've noticed with distcc or with multiple cores, using -j6 doesn't seem to trigger the OOM issue, it's just the final linker phase that eats up so much memory.
Not sure if it matters with PGO or not, I left it on since a snappy browser is good too.
Here's what I found so far, all machines running X11/Gnome while building except where marked:
384MB Physical + 384MB swap : FAIL
384MB Physical + 384MB swap + 512MB swap : FAIL
384MB Physical + 384MB swap + 1GB swap (and killed X11/Gnome): pass
1GB physical + 0 swap : FAIL
1GB physical + 512MB swap: pass
2GB physical + 1GB swap + tmpfs portage build: FAIL (disabling tmpfs build was solution)
4GB physical + 512MB swap + tmpfs portage build: pass
Hope this helps anyone who wants to build firefox, and I suspect firefox8 will have the same issue and will need to do the same dance once more...
Now why didn't I just ~x86 and build firefox 8 anyway.... _________________ Intel Core i7 2700K/Radeon R7 250/24GB DDR3/256GB SSD
What am I supposed watching? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|