View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Xake Guru
Joined: 11 Feb 2004 Posts: 588 Location: Göteborg, the rainy part of scandinavia
|
Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
pussi wrote: | Xorg 7.0 didn't start here either with that environmet variable set, but I put export LD_BIND_DIRECT=1 in my .xinitrc, which is basically the same to me. |
Can confirm this (and another guy in the thread for modular X too).
I have that string exported by a file in /etc/env.d/ and if I compile xorg as modular I got the "can't load fixed font"-error. However if I merge <6.9 I got no problems (I believe this is becouse of stripped flags during build). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
infirit l33t
Joined: 11 Jan 2003 Posts: 778 Location: Hoofddorp / The Netherlands
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
nxsty Veteran
Joined: 23 Jun 2004 Posts: 1556 Location: .se
|
Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2006 1:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I updated the patch tarball with the latest -Bdirect patch and the -Hashvals patch from suse. You need to create your own binutils overlay for the later since it's not included in portage. The 2.3.90 ebuild still has the older patch.
Has anyone tried to use binutils 2.16.91.0.5 globaly btw? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
thersites Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 12 Oct 2004 Posts: 101 Location: South West China
|
Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2006 1:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
nxsty - yes, I've been using binutils-2.16.91.0.5 globally since in came in portage with no problems. This is x86 with your glibc-2.3.90 and the gcc-4.2 weekly snapshots.
glibc-2.3.90.20060121 needs this fix
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.glibc.alpha/10901
to compile with the last two weeks' gcc-4.2.
Good stuff - thanks for all the work.
[edit - doh!] |
|
Back to top |
|
|
nxsty Veteran
Joined: 23 Jun 2004 Posts: 1556 Location: .se
|
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 1:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Xake wrote: | Can confirm this (and another guy in the thread for modular X too).
I have that string exported by a file in /etc/env.d/ and if I compile xorg as modular I got the "can't load fixed font"-error. However if I merge <6.9 I got no problems (I believe this is becouse of stripped flags during build). |
6.9 and below with the imake build system doesn't listen to the LDFLAGS variable so that's why they're unaffected.
I'm rebuilding world with the new linker optimizations and binutils 2.16.91.0.5 now btw. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
porges n00b
Joined: 07 Aug 2005 Posts: 14
|
Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 1:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
D'oh. I went from glibc 2.3.90 to 2.3.6 to try out the new optimizations and forgot that it would break things. (I.E. everything that's needed to reinstall 2.3.90...) Any ideas? :p |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tyler_Durden Apprentice
Joined: 27 Jul 2004 Posts: 189 Location: Germany
|
Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 11:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
porges wrote: | D'oh. I went from glibc 2.3.90 to 2.3.6 to try out the new optimizations and forgot that it would break things. (I.E. everything that's needed to reinstall 2.3.90...) Any ideas? :p |
From my experiences this breaks at first some tools of coreutils, like rm, mv, mkdir, install, touch & readlink. So it's not possible to emerge everything after that, reboot will fail too. Booting from an up-to-date gentoo-cd, copy these files over, then emerge coreutils, fileutils and findutils solved this for me. _________________ Gentoo 17.1 x86_64
Intel Core i9-9900K
Asus MAXIMUS XI HERO
AMD Radeon 6800XT
64GB DDR4
Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 1TB
8x Seagate Archive (SATA-RAID 64TB)
Digital Devices Cine S2 V6.5 DVB Adapter |
|
Back to top |
|
|
teh-steve n00b
Joined: 28 Jan 2005 Posts: 27 Location: Worcester
|
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 3:15 am Post subject: Broken! |
|
|
I am trying to compile your glibc overlay with the following USE flags:
Code: | -build -erandom -gcc4sp -glibc-compat20 +glibc-omitfp -hardened -linuxthreads-tls (-multilib) +nls +nomalloccheck +nptl +nptlonly -pic -profile (-selinux) +userlocales |
At the moment, I am using gcc-3.4.5, glibc-2.3.5-r2, binutils-2.16.1-r1, libtool-1.5.22, linux-headers-2.6.11-r3, and ck-sources-2.6.15_p3 on the x86 platform. Specifically, a Pentium-M.
When I try to emerge the overlay, though, I get the following error from the ebuild:
Code: | *** On GNU/Linux systems it is normal to compile GNU libc with the
*** 'nptl' add-on. Without that, the library will be
*** incompatible with normal GNU/Linux systems.
*** If you really mean to not use this add-on, run configure again
*** using the extra parameter '--disable-sanity-checks'.
!!! ERROR: sys-libs/glibc-2.3.90-20060121 failed.
!!! Function glibc_do_configure, Linx 968, Exitcode 1
!!! failed to configure glibc
!!! If you need support, post the topmost build error, NOT this status message. |
I turned off all of my CFLAGS and LDFLAGS to ensure that they were not the problem. Leaving -march=pentium-m on did not work, nor did -march=pentium3 or -march=pentium4. I can post my emerge info upon request.
So, I'm quite sick of this old glibc. Does anyone know what's wrong and how I might be able to fix it? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
taylorpendley n00b
Joined: 23 Jan 2006 Posts: 41
|
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 7:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
i might be wrong but i think gcc-4.1* is only gcc that will compile 2.3.9 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
no idea n00b
Joined: 03 Jan 2006 Posts: 43 Location: Zagreb
|
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 9:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
taylorpendley wrote: | i might be wrong but i think gcc-4.1* is only gcc that will compile 2.3.9 |
nope, i compiled 2.3.9 with gcc-4.0.3.* overlay......and it works perfectly fine |
|
Back to top |
|
|
nxsty Veteran
Joined: 23 Jun 2004 Posts: 1556 Location: .se
|
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 9:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
taylorpendley wrote: | i might be wrong but i think gcc-4.1* is only gcc that will compile 2.3.9 |
Gcc 4.1 is recomended but only 3.4 is required on x86 and amd64. Some other arches will require gcc 4.0 or 4.1 it seems. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
nxsty Veteran
Joined: 23 Jun 2004 Posts: 1556 Location: .se
|
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 9:32 am Post subject: Re: Broken! |
|
|
teh-steve wrote: |
When I try to emerge the overlay, though, I get the following error from the ebuild: |
Early in the build it should say something like:
Code: | * Configuring GLIBC for nptl with:
--enable-omitfp
--with-tls
--with-__thread
--enable-add-ons=nptl,c_stubs,libidn
--enable-kernel=2.6.11
--without-selinux
--without-cvs
--enable-bind-now
--build=i686-pc-linux-gnu
--host=i686-pc-linux-gnu
--disable-profile
--without-gd
--with-headers=//usr/include
--prefix=/usr
--mandir=/usr/share/man
--infodir=/usr/share/info
--libexecdir=/usr/lib/misc/glibc |
Does it have --enable-add-ons=nptl? Is there any reason you don't use the stable 2.3.6-r2 release btw? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mrcs Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 10 Oct 2003 Posts: 137
|
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 3:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
nxsty wrote: | I'm rebuilding world with the new linker optimizations and binutils 2.16.91.0.5 now btw. |
How did that work out? Any noticable speed improvements? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
enderandrew l33t
Joined: 25 Oct 2005 Posts: 731
|
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 7:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Should I be using the 2.3.6-r2 or 2.3.90* these days? _________________ Nihilism makes me smile. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
teh-steve n00b
Joined: 28 Jan 2005 Posts: 27 Location: Worcester
|
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 8:22 pm Post subject: Re: Broken! |
|
|
No, mine looks more like this:
Code: | * Configuring GLIBC for linuxthreads with:
--disable-dev-erandom
--enable-omitfp
--without-tls
--without-__thread
--enable-add-ons=linuxthreads,c_stubs,libidn
--enable-kernel=2.4.1
--without-selinux
--without-cvs
--enable-bind-now
--build=i386-pc-linux-gnu
--host=i386-pc-linux-gnu
--disable-profile
--without-gd
--with-headers=//usr/include
--prefix=/usr
--mandir=/usr/share/man
--infodir=/usr/share/info
--libexecdir=/usr/lib/misc/glibc |
Clearly it's broken and not picking up my USE flags at all.
nxsty wrote: | Is there any reason you don't use the stable 2.3.6-r2 release btw? |
Yeah. It fails with some weird error about not finding a register in general regs or something weird. I'd post the message but I really don't want to wait for it to fail. Maybe late.r |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dkey n00b
Joined: 11 May 2005 Posts: 25
|
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 8:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
did anybody test again with memcpy.c? i did, but i get following output:
dkey_amd64 dkey # cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_cur_freq
2400000
dkey_amd64 dkey # ./memcpy 2400 1000 1048576
Memory to memory copy rate = 676.704468 MBytes / sec. Block size = 1048576.
before i had about 2300 MB/s, changes i made was:
updated gcc to current 4.1 beta
updated glibc to the lastest release here
kernel 2.6.16-rc1-mm5 (others as well)
does current gcc make this bad performance, or is something else going wrong? :/
thx,
dkey |
|
Back to top |
|
|
nxsty Veteran
Joined: 23 Jun 2004 Posts: 1556 Location: .se
|
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 8:53 pm Post subject: Re: Broken! |
|
|
teh-steve wrote: | No, mine looks more like this: |
It fails because your CHOST is i386-pc-linux-gnu and NPTL requires at least i486, and the older linuxthreads library that runs on i386s is not supported in 2.3.90. The CHOST is probably also why 2.3.6 fails to compile. But changing CHOST is not easy. You could probably make it compile anyway by running:
EXTRA_ECONF="--disable-sanity-checks" emerge glibc |
|
Back to top |
|
|
nxsty Veteran
Joined: 23 Jun 2004 Posts: 1556 Location: .se
|
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 8:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
kireru wrote: | nxsty wrote: | I'm rebuilding world with the new linker optimizations and binutils 2.16.91.0.5 now btw. |
How did that work out? Any noticable speed improvements? |
Absolutely, my system feels very snappy and fast now. Konquror comes up immedietly when I click on the icon on the panel without preloading or prelink. The only problem I have is that I can't run prelink because it nukes all binaries. I guess it's somehow incompatible with these linker optimizations. I posted about it on the bug report but haven't got any responses yet. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
SinoTech Advocate
Joined: 20 Mar 2004 Posts: 2579 Location: Neunkirchen / Saarland / Germany
|
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 8:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dkey wrote: |
[...]
does current gcc make this bad performance, or is something else going wrong? :/
thx,
dkey |
Got the current gcc-4.1.X release (The latest one available through portage) and the memcpy example still works fine.
Anyway, I don't use the current glibc (Have the one installed available through ~21. January). Perhaps you've forgot the "-O{2,3}" switch?
Regards,
Sino
Last edited by SinoTech on Tue Feb 07, 2006 8:58 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
nxsty Veteran
Joined: 23 Jun 2004 Posts: 1556 Location: .se
|
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 8:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dkey wrote: | did anybody test again with memcpy.c? i did, but i get following output: |
Did you reboot after the upgrade? Upgrading glibc and running memcpy.c without rebooting gives me similar results. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dkey n00b
Joined: 11 May 2005 Posts: 25
|
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 9:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
nxsty wrote: | dkey wrote: | did anybody test again with memcpy.c? i did, but i get following output: |
Did you reboot after the upgrade? Upgrading glibc and running memcpy.c without rebooting gives me similar results. |
yes, I did reboot a few times since the update. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dkey n00b
Joined: 11 May 2005 Posts: 25
|
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 9:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
a friend of mine gets the same result on an amd64 with current glibc, gcc and other components. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mrcs Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 10 Oct 2003 Posts: 137
|
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 9:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
nxsty wrote: | Absolutely, my system feels very snappy and fast now. Konquror comes up immedietly when I click on the icon on the panel without preloading or prelink. The only problem I have is that I can't run prelink because it nukes all binaries. I guess it's somehow incompatible with these linker optimizations. I posted about it on the bug report but haven't got any responses yet. |
Sounds good to me! Time to quickpkg and try this out, I might even go crazy and use GCC 4.1. Just got to remember to shun prelink for a while then
Thanks for doing this btw! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
6D7474 Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 Posts: 135
|
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 9:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dkey wrote: | nxsty wrote: | dkey wrote: | did anybody test again with memcpy.c? i did, but i get following output: |
Did you reboot after the upgrade? Upgrading glibc and running memcpy.c without rebooting gives me similar results. |
yes, I did reboot a few times since the update. |
as SinoTech mentioned, you should compile memcpy.c with at least -O1 flag... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dkey n00b
Joined: 11 May 2005 Posts: 25
|
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 9:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
6D7474 wrote: | dkey wrote: | nxsty wrote: | dkey wrote: | did anybody test again with memcpy.c? i did, but i get following output: |
Did you reboot after the upgrade? Upgrading glibc and running memcpy.c without rebooting gives me similar results. |
yes, I did reboot a few times since the update. |
as SinoTech mentioned, you should compile memcpy.c with at least -O1 flag... |
thx! that solved the "problem" now i'm running ~2400MB/s again. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|