On 07/23/10 12:23 PM, Willem Jan Palenstijn wrote:
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 12:06:24PM +0100, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
On 07/23/10 11:59 AM, Fran?ois Bissey wrote:
I just tried to build Sage, and got a failure with building IML. See log
here.
http://boxen.math.washington.edu/home/kirkby/iml-1.0.1.p12.log
As soon as I restarted "make" again, so the build completed ok.
Looks like a parallel make issue, which is why it worked when you restarted
make.
Some of the objects used probably weren't ready yet and their build completed
after the building of these 2 particular objects died.
So when you restarted it was fine. Cannot really inspect that in depth right
now.
Francois
If that is so, I think we should unset MAKE in IML, if it can't reliably
be built in parallel.
Any thoughts from anyone else?
While I'm not discounting a parallel make issue entirely, it doesn't look like
a typical one. The failing .lo's include the first one to be built in a
non-parallel build, so it seems unlikely that one would be suffering from
missing dependencies. (And there are no errors reporting missing files.)
No, I was a bit puzzled I must admit.
Could you have hit some kind of resource limit?
I don't think so.
Maybe a maximum number of
processes per user?
I'm not aware of what limits there are. Certainly nothing is set in ulimit,
though there must be some limits somewhere.
Max mem usage?
No, there is 12 GB of RAM and 6 GB swap space. Sage was building, Thunderbird
and Firefox running, but nothing to bother a machine with 12 GB RAM.
Disk space?
There's 939 GB free on that file system. So that seems even less likely!
-Willem Jan
Dave
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URL: http://www.sagemath.org
