View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
superjaded l33t
Joined: 05 Jul 2002 Posts: 802
|
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2002 6:45 pm Post subject: screen takes an inordinate amount of CPU to open windows |
|
|
I just recently went from my 1.2 Gentoo system to a "true" 1.4 system with GCC 3.2 (after I got bored of recompiline every for 12+ hours ;/), and everything seems to be working fine (for the most part) except for screen, it seems, now takes up 50-100% of my CPU whenever I create new windows (meaning whenever I start screen or do ^A-C).. it seems that normal operations aside from that work fine..
using:
Duron 900mhz / 512mb SDRAM
used a Gentoo 1.4 stage1 tarball (downloaded it yesterday) and a 1.2 boot CD
GCC 3.2
screen 3.9.11-r3
wasn't able to find anything on here about it.. nor anything obvious on screen's page (and the only thing I really found about a CPU overload seemed to be a general CPU overload.. on a BSD system..).. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dev Apprentice
Joined: 06 Jul 2002 Posts: 248 Location: San Antonio, TX
|
Posted: Wed Aug 28, 2002 1:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
After a complete upgrade from 1.2 to 1.4 via the same method as you, I'm experiencing the exact same problem. Although its just fairly annoying as hell, I would like to find some resolution. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
WarMachine Apprentice
Joined: 15 Jul 2002 Posts: 181
|
Posted: Wed Aug 28, 2002 8:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I just today noticed screen taking an exceptionally long time to resume or create any new windows. I may have updated it yesterday in an emerge -u world but I don't think so. I'd like to fix it though, pretty obnoxious. This is a P2 333mhz with 160 MB ram |
|
Back to top |
|
|
CowboyNeal n00b
Joined: 16 May 2002 Posts: 44 Location: The Netherlands
|
Posted: Fri Aug 30, 2002 7:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have exact the same problem on a fresh emerged gentoo system (running on a P200, 64MB). I ran LFS on it before and screen wasn't slow at all!
*Very strange*
I'll better check emerge rsync now, maybe it's fixed |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jthj Apprentice
Joined: 04 Jun 2002 Posts: 176 Location: The Matrix Has Me....
|
Posted: Fri Aug 30, 2002 9:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I also have experienced this problem when trying gentoo 1.4 with gcc 3.2 but It seems to work fine on another box built from gcc 2.95.3. I had some other gcc 3.2 problems and am rebuilding that machine using standard gentoo 1.2 with gcc 2.95.3. I'll update once it's done as to whether screen is functioning properly or not. _________________ 01001010 01010100 01001000 01001010 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jthj Apprentice
Joined: 04 Jun 2002 Posts: 176 Location: The Matrix Has Me....
|
Posted: Sun Sep 01, 2002 6:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
as an update I have recompiled with gcc 2.95.3 and my screen still takes freakin forever to open! And the proceeds to eat up a whole bunch (like 35%) cpu time! This is a problem as I use screen often. So hopefully I or someone else will figure this one out soon! _________________ 01001010 01010100 01001000 01001010 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
CowboyNeal n00b
Joined: 16 May 2002 Posts: 44 Location: The Netherlands
|
Posted: Sun Sep 01, 2002 9:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
The problem becomes even more vague:
I've got a pentium200 and a Via eden running gentoo. The pentium 200's installation is about a week old, the Eden's installation is older (months).
The pentium200 is suffering from the "slow down problem" (as described in the other posts) and runs screen ebuild 3.9.11-r3.
The Via eden is not suffering from the "slow down problem", but it is running the same version/ebuild of screen. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jthj Apprentice
Joined: 04 Jun 2002 Posts: 176 Location: The Matrix Has Me....
|
Posted: Sun Sep 01, 2002 4:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah it's the same here I checked and my laptop which I just build and my desktop which I built back in July have the same versions of screen. Laptop has the problem desktop works fine. _________________ 01001010 01010100 01001000 01001010 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Therion n00b
Joined: 16 Aug 2002 Posts: 8 Location: Tennessee
|
Posted: Sun Sep 01, 2002 4:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Just out of curiosity, did any/most/all of you compile your kernel with "Preemptible Kernel" support enabled, on the systems that are now experiencing difficulties? _________________ ...you live, you learn.
...you die, you learn faster. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jthj Apprentice
Joined: 04 Jun 2002 Posts: 176 Location: The Matrix Has Me....
|
Posted: Sun Sep 01, 2002 5:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Therion wrote: | Just out of curiosity, did any/most/all of you compile your kernel with "Preemptible Kernel" support enabled, on the systems that are now experiencing difficulties? |
Both of my systems have the pre-empt patch enabled and one has problems, one works fine. So I don't think that's it. _________________ 01001010 01010100 01001000 01001010 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
CowboyNeal n00b
Joined: 16 May 2002 Posts: 44 Location: The Netherlands
|
Posted: Sun Sep 01, 2002 6:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
jthj wrote: | Therion wrote: | Just out of curiosity, did any/most/all of you compile your kernel with "Preemptible Kernel" support enabled, on the systems that are now experiencing difficulties? |
Both of my systems have the pre-empt patch enabled and one has problems, one works fine. So I don't think that's it. |
None of my systems have the pre-empt patch enabled/installed. Both of them run the vanilla 2.4.19 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jthj Apprentice
Joined: 04 Jun 2002 Posts: 176 Location: The Matrix Has Me....
|
Posted: Sun Sep 01, 2002 6:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I wonder if this has something to do with a dependancy like maybe glibc or something changing...... _________________ 01001010 01010100 01001000 01001010 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
CowboyNeal n00b
Joined: 16 May 2002 Posts: 44 Location: The Netherlands
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
CowboyNeal n00b
Joined: 16 May 2002 Posts: 44 Location: The Netherlands
|
Posted: Mon Sep 02, 2002 8:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[this should be on the bugreport, however, I have no account or patience]
I sacrificed my system-with-working-screen to determine the 'problem' package (by slowly emerging one ebuild at a time).
It appears to be baselayout-1.8.2.
Now I have two systems without a working-but-oh-so-usefull-screen .
(btw. i emerged intltool-0.22 and utillinux-2.11u before baselayout, but those didn't affect screen). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jthj Apprentice
Joined: 04 Jun 2002 Posts: 176 Location: The Matrix Has Me....
|
Posted: Mon Sep 02, 2002 10:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
your sacrafice is apreciated _________________ 01001010 01010100 01001000 01001010 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dev Apprentice
Joined: 06 Jul 2002 Posts: 248 Location: San Antonio, TX
|
Posted: Mon Sep 02, 2002 11:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: | someone posted to gentoo-users that removing /etc/termcap will stop the problem, as the time seems to be taken by parsing that file... I tried this and it worked for me. The question is, will there be any negative effects by removing /etc/termcap? |
This worked for me also. As this person asked, what effect will this have on my system? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
CowboyNeal n00b
Joined: 16 May 2002 Posts: 44 Location: The Netherlands
|
Posted: Tue Sep 03, 2002 1:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If I recall correctly, termcap was obsoleted by terminfo.
Futhermore, termcap was added by baselayout, not by a real lib like curses or slang.
edit:
I removed /etc/termcap too, screen is now acting normal, however this isn't a solution
Last edited by CowboyNeal on Tue Sep 03, 2002 9:33 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tuxisuau Apprentice
Joined: 04 May 2002 Posts: 213 Location: Catalunya (Europe)
|
Posted: Tue Sep 03, 2002 2:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm having the same problem. Gentoo 1.4 here, built with -march=athlon -O3 -pipe. _________________ IM me at tuxisuau@jabber.7a69ezine.org |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dev Apprentice
Joined: 06 Jul 2002 Posts: 248 Location: San Antonio, TX
|
Posted: Thu Sep 05, 2002 2:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: | I removed /etc/termcap too, screen is now acting normal, however this isn't a solution |
If termcap is obsolete, then wouldn't the solution be for the gentoo devs to remove baselayout from adding it to /etc ? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jthj Apprentice
Joined: 04 Jun 2002 Posts: 176 Location: The Matrix Has Me....
|
Posted: Fri Sep 06, 2002 7:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
I did a re-emerge of baselayot it didn't have a newer version but there were newer versions for it's deps that got upgraded and screen appears to be working fine for me now on the box that was having problems before. _________________ 01001010 01010100 01001000 01001010 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|