Re: [gentoo-user] Voice synthesizers? (not neccessarily TTS!)
wabe wrote: > tu...@posteo.de wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I am looking for a (not neccessarily GENTOO) software, whith which > > it is possible to synthesize the human voice (male / female). > > > > It does not neccessarily need to be a TTS (I tried some) -- but the > > voice needs easily to be tuned in the sense of pitch and sound. > > > > Suppose you want a synthetic voice of Frodo talking some Tengwar > > (and dont want to mimic the movies actors ;) or the northern slang > > of some Elbish ... ;) > > > > Another example would be vocaloid (commercial product). > > > > Is there some software of this kind somewhere for Linux? > > > > Thanks a lot for any voice coming up for this ! :))) > > It's some years ago that I use speech synthesizers and I can't > remember all details. > > First I use mbrola for some years. Unfortunately it is not an open > source program but it is available for gentoo. For some reason > (that I don't remember, maybe because it's not open source or > maybe because there is no 64bit binary) I switched over to espeak. > Later I also used festival. But I still used the mbrola voices > together with espeak and also with festival because they have a > very good quality (I downloaded some high quality mbrola voices > from the mbrola homepage). P.S.: It is possible to tune some parameters for mbrola so that you can let it even sing a song. I can't remember if this is also possible with espeak or festival. -- Regards wabe
Re: [gentoo-user] Voice synthesizers? (not neccessarily TTS!)
tu...@posteo.de wrote: > Hi, > > I am looking for a (not neccessarily GENTOO) software, whith which > it is possible to synthesize the human voice (male / female). > > It does not neccessarily need to be a TTS (I tried some) -- but the > voice needs easily to be tuned in the sense of pitch and sound. > > Suppose you want a synthetic voice of Frodo talking some Tengwar (and > dont want to mimic the movies actors ;) or the northern slang of some > Elbish ... ;) > > Another example would be vocaloid (commercial product). > > Is there some software of this kind somewhere for Linux? > > Thanks a lot for any voice coming up for this ! :))) It's some years ago that I use speech synthesizers and I can't remember all details. First I use mbrola for some years. Unfortunately it is not an open source program but it is available for gentoo. For some reason (that I don't remember, maybe because it's not open source or maybe because there is no 64bit binary) I switched over to espeak. Later I also used festival. But I still used the mbrola voices together with espeak and also with festival because they have a very good quality (I downloaded some high quality mbrola voices from the mbrola homepage). -- Regards wabe
[gentoo-user] Re: ebuild: package specific CFLAGS
On 04/28/2017 10:10 PM, Ian Zimmerman wrote: > I'm trying to create an ebuild of a crufty old program that needs > -fgnu89-inline in compiler flags to have any chance of building. > > What's the way to do that in an ebuild? I could have something like > > src_configure() { > econf $(use_enable nls) CFLAGS=-fgnu89-inline > } > > but then, will this not _override_ (rather than add to, as desired) the > CFLAGS from make.conf? > If you want a particular flag to be added to CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS within an ebuild, you can inherit flag-o-matic, then call "append-flags -fgnu89-inline" in src_configure before the econf line. If you explicitly only want to set CFLAGS (and not CXXFLAGS), then call "append-cflags" (there is also a append-cppflags, append-cxxflags, append-ldflags, append-fflags). -- Jonathan Callen signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] How to get memtest onto a USB drive
Peter Humphrey wrote: > On Sunday 30 Apr 2017 15:05:41 Mick wrote: >> On Sunday 30 Apr 2017 01:33:29 Peter Humphrey wrote: >>> Here's a picture of the BIOS screen. This hardware is kaput. >> It may not be. > You're right - it wasn't. > >> Try re-seating the HDMI/DVI/VGA? cable between the PC and the monitor with >> the PC off. Then boot up and see it if persists. > It was the USB stick. I should have tried that before bleating here. > > Sorry about the noise. > I wouldn't view it as noise. If someone else posts later about a problem like this, someone here will likely remember this and be able to share what you discovered. So, while it wasn't what you expected it to be, that doesn't mean others won't learn a little something from it. For me, I find it odd that a broken USB stick would cause that. I would have expected it to not boot at all or something. Weird. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gcc with graphite flag?
On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 11:34:44PM +0300, Nikos Chantziaras wrote > On 04/30/2017 10:36 PM, Walter Dnes wrote: > > > > For Pale Moon, the developers want... > > > > -floop-parallelize-all -fpredictive-commoning -ftree-loop-distribution > > -ftree-vectorize > > > > I follow those specs when doing a contributed build. > > Are these using graphite though? Yes. Non-graphite GCC errors out if I include them in CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS. Try for yourself. Include those flags, if you don't have graphite, and try to build something. See also https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Graphite/Parallelization > First step of autopar in Graphite has been done. You can trigger it > by 2 flags -floop-parallelize-all -ftree-parallelize-loops=4. Both > of them is needed, the first flag will trigger Graphite pass to mark > loops that can be parallel and the second flag will trigger the code > generation part. -- Walter Dnes I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: htop wants cgroups
On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 1:14 PM, Kai Krakow wrote: > Am Sun, 30 Apr 2017 12:36:03 -0700 > schrieb Jorge Almeida : >> The warnings don't bother me that much, I just feel they are Bad >> Policy. Enabling cgroups would add unnecessary complexity to the >> kernel configuration, if only a bit. > > On the other hand, if such warning weren't there, it would make > installing full-featured systems more difficult. And any experienced > Gentoo user can decide on her/his own how to react to such warnings. > > I like to have such warnings in. It gives me hints what I like to have > and what not and gives me the opportunity to improve my knowledge by > researching on that warning. > > An improvement could maybe be made: Such warnings could tell links into > the Gentoo wiki for further information on that topic. > Yes, positive warnings would make the difference: "Your kernel lacks support for cfoo. You can use this package but feature bar will be disabled. See "https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Bar_great"; As opposed to: "Your kernel lacks support for cfoo. You absolutely must enable cfoo, everybody knows that, what were you thinking?! Do the right thing or else..." Regards Jorge
[gentoo-user] Re: gcc with graphite flag?
On 04/30/2017 10:36 PM, Walter Dnes wrote: On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 10:09:16PM +0300, Nikos Chantziaras wrote On 04/30/2017 05:04 PM, J. Roeleveld wrote: On Sunday, April 30, 2017 2:18:42 PM CEST Nikos Chantziaras wrote: Btw, I don't think that USE flag is useful for anything, unless you put the graphite optimization flags in your CFLAGS (-floop-interchange -floop-strip-mine -floop-block). If you don't use those, there shouldn't be a reason to enable the graphite flag. Is there any benefit from using graphite and these CFLAGS on a current Gentoo system? Using a simple google-search, I can't find anything recent. What Rasmus said, but the differences aren't going to be noticeable in general use. For heavy number crunching (like video encoding) or huge batch jobs or high-traffic servers maybe, but for normal desktop PC use there's not going to be a difference. For Pale Moon, the developers want... -floop-parallelize-all -fpredictive-commoning -ftree-loop-distribution -ftree-vectorize I follow those specs when doing a contributed build. Are these using graphite though?
[gentoo-user] Re: htop wants cgroups
Am Sun, 30 Apr 2017 10:33:05 -0700 schrieb Jorge Almeida : > > It allows portage to properly shut down remaining processes from > > ebuild build phases by knowing exactly which processes have been > > spawn in the compile phase, and it allows openrc to better manage > > the processes and proper shut down any processes belonging to a > > service. > > I understand that, in principle. In practice, sshd works fine without > it, for example. And portage doesn't have a cgroups related USE > variable. Doesn't mean I won't find a need for it, someday. It does have such a FEATURE in make.conf and it's used to better manage run-away processes from build phases. > > Also you may benefit from setting resource limits and fair resource > > sharing for a group of processes where ulimit applies only to single > > processes and doesn't know about resource shares at all. > > > > Overall, it makes sense to have it. > > It makes sense that the kernel has it. Should it be enabled? For a > server, probably. For a single-user workstation? Maybe. Maybe I don't have the ordinary workstation, but I use it to limit memory of sometimes-run-away services (memory-wise) and to control resource usage of container machines I'm using during development. Probably not the ordinary use-case... -- Regards, Kai Replies to list-only preferred.
[gentoo-user] Re: htop wants cgroups
Am Sun, 30 Apr 2017 12:36:03 -0700 schrieb Jorge Almeida : > On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 12:14 PM, Nikos Chantziaras > wrote: > > On 04/30/2017 08:33 PM, Jorge Almeida wrote: > >> > >> On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Kai Krakow > >> wrote: > [...] > > > > > You can enable cgroups in the kernel and then simply not use them. > > This will shut it up. It's what I do :-P > > > The warnings don't bother me that much, I just feel they are Bad > Policy. Enabling cgroups would add unnecessary complexity to the > kernel configuration, if only a bit. On the other hand, if such warning weren't there, it would make installing full-featured systems more difficult. And any experienced Gentoo user can decide on her/his own how to react to such warnings. I like to have such warnings in. It gives me hints what I like to have and what not and gives me the opportunity to improve my knowledge by researching on that warning. An improvement could maybe be made: Such warnings could tell links into the Gentoo wiki for further information on that topic. -- Regards, Kai Replies to list-only preferred.
[gentoo-user] freetype-2.7 USE flags
I understand that freetype-2.7 enabled by default the code that emulates the so called ClearType technique on Windows (a.k.a. blurry fonts). In older versions that code was turned on with the "infinality" USE flag. "infinality" is still there but now there is also a new "cleartype_hinting" flag. I am confused. Can anyone explain exactly what each of these flags do and how they interact? -- Please *no* private Cc: on mailing lists and newsgroups Personal signed mail: please _encrypt_ and sign Don't clear-text sign: http://primate.net/~itz/blog/the-problem-with-gpg-signatures.html
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gcc with graphite flag?
On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 10:09:16PM +0300, Nikos Chantziaras wrote > On 04/30/2017 05:04 PM, J. Roeleveld wrote: > > On Sunday, April 30, 2017 2:18:42 PM CEST Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > >> > >> Btw, I don't think that USE flag is useful for anything, unless you put > >> the graphite optimization flags in your CFLAGS (-floop-interchange > >> -floop-strip-mine -floop-block). If you don't use those, there shouldn't > >> be a reason to enable the graphite flag. > > > > > > Is there any benefit from using graphite and these CFLAGS on a current > > Gentoo system? > > > > Using a simple google-search, I can't find anything recent. > > What Rasmus said, but the differences aren't going to be noticeable in > general use. For heavy number crunching (like video encoding) or huge > batch jobs or high-traffic servers maybe, but for normal desktop PC use > there's not going to be a difference. For Pale Moon, the developers want... -floop-parallelize-all -fpredictive-commoning -ftree-loop-distribution -ftree-vectorize I follow those specs when doing a contributed build. -- Walter Dnes I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: htop wants cgroups
On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 12:14 PM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > On 04/30/2017 08:33 PM, Jorge Almeida wrote: >> >> On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Kai Krakow wrote: >>> >>> Am Sun, 30 Apr 2017 09:26:16 -0700 >>> schrieb Jorge Almeida : > > You can enable cgroups in the kernel and then simply not use them. This will > shut it up. It's what I do :-P > The warnings don't bother me that much, I just feel they are Bad Policy. Enabling cgroups would add unnecessary complexity to the kernel configuration, if only a bit. Jorge
[gentoo-user] Re: htop wants cgroups
On 04/30/2017 08:33 PM, Jorge Almeida wrote: On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Kai Krakow wrote: Am Sun, 30 Apr 2017 09:26:16 -0700 schrieb Jorge Almeida : Well, it says "should be" enabled. It's not a requirement. You may not use some of htop's features like proper process grouping. Yes, and the emerge finished withou error. But the language of the warning suggests that nasty things would happen to such people as would fail to comply. You can enable cgroups in the kernel and then simply not use them. This will shut it up. It's what I do :-P
[gentoo-user] Re: gcc with graphite flag?
On 04/30/2017 05:04 PM, J. Roeleveld wrote: On Sunday, April 30, 2017 2:18:42 PM CEST Nikos Chantziaras wrote: On 04/30/2017 05:25 AM, Walter Dnes wrote: So much for that wiki entry. BTW, I ended up putting... sys-devel/gcc graphite ...in package.use. The "graphite" USE flag means something entirely different for harfbuzz, i.e. build against media-libs/harfbuzz against media-gfx/graphite2 Btw, I don't think that USE flag is useful for anything, unless you put the graphite optimization flags in your CFLAGS (-floop-interchange -floop-strip-mine -floop-block). If you don't use those, there shouldn't be a reason to enable the graphite flag. Is there any benefit from using graphite and these CFLAGS on a current Gentoo system? Using a simple google-search, I can't find anything recent. What Rasmus said, but the differences aren't going to be noticeable in general use. For heavy number crunching (like video encoding) or huge batch jobs or high-traffic servers maybe, but for normal desktop PC use there's not going to be a difference.
Re: [gentoo-user] How to get memtest onto a USB drive
On Sunday 30 Apr 2017 15:05:41 Mick wrote: > On Sunday 30 Apr 2017 01:33:29 Peter Humphrey wrote: > > Here's a picture of the BIOS screen. This hardware is kaput. > > It may not be. You're right - it wasn't. > Try re-seating the HDMI/DVI/VGA? cable between the PC and the monitor with > the PC off. Then boot up and see it if persists. It was the USB stick. I should have tried that before bleating here. Sorry about the noise. -- Regards Peter
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: htop wants cgroups
On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Kai Krakow wrote: > Am Sun, 30 Apr 2017 09:26:16 -0700 > schrieb Jorge Almeida : > > Well, it says "should be" enabled. It's not a requirement. You may not > use some of htop's features like proper process grouping. Yes, and the emerge finished withou error. But the language of the warning suggests that nasty things would happen to such people as would fail to comply. > > > I would be interested in why you wouldn't want to use cgroups. cgroups is NOT a pet hate of mine. I'll enable it if there is a good reason. But I dislike enabling stuff when I don't understand the need (and words like "correct" and "should" don't really help, and make me think of FUD). Besides > being a requirement for systemd, it also has very valid use cases for This is the well-known reason to enable cgroups. I don't use systemd. > other software you probably use: > > It allows portage to properly shut down remaining processes from ebuild > build phases by knowing exactly which processes have been spawn in the > compile phase, and it allows openrc to better manage the processes and > proper shut down any processes belonging to a service. I understand that, in principle. In practice, sshd works fine without it, for example. And portage doesn't have a cgroups related USE variable. Doesn't mean I won't find a need for it, someday. > > Also you may benefit from setting resource limits and fair resource > sharing for a group of processes where ulimit applies only to single > processes and doesn't know about resource shares at all. > > Overall, it makes sense to have it. It makes sense that the kernel has it. Should it be enabled? For a server, probably. For a single-user workstation? Maybe. I just think this kind of stuff shouldn't be pushed unless really necessary, in which case the Gentoo handbook probably would say so. (Your mail contributes to clarify the reasons why one might want to use it.) Regards Jorge
Re: [gentoo-user] htop wants cgroups
I think that it's meant to "touch a chord", to make sure that you have the necessary kernel configs enabled before you report a bug because something doesn't work Sent from ProtonMail mobile Original Message On 30 Apr 2017, 19:04, Jorge Almeida wrote: On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Rasmus wrote: > Hi, > > it's possible to use htop without the cgroup config in your kernel, but htop > is able to display cgroups (which it obviously isn't able to if those aren't > enabled in the kernel), so emerge throws this warning. If you don't want to > display your cgroups in htop you don't need to change anything. > OK. But the language of the warning sort of touches a chord. Regards Jorge
Re: [gentoo-user] htop wants cgroups
On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Rasmus wrote: > Hi, > > it's possible to use htop without the cgroup config in your kernel, but htop > is able to display cgroups (which it obviously isn't able to if those aren't > enabled in the kernel), so emerge throws this warning. If you don't want to > display your cgroups in htop you don't need to change anything. > OK. But the language of the warning sort of touches a chord. Regards Jorge
Re: [gentoo-user] replacement for ftp?
On Tue, 25 Apr 2017 15:29:18 +0100 lee wrote: > > Hi, > > since the usage of FTP seems to be declining, what is a replacement > which is at least as good as FTP? I fail to see why FTP needs to be replaced: it works, it is supported, it is secure when used with care, it is damn fast. Best regards, Andrew Savchenko pgpH4meGDETra.pgp Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-user] Re: htop wants cgroups
Am Sun, 30 Apr 2017 09:26:16 -0700 schrieb Jorge Almeida : > Why? > > emerging htop yields this message: > * CONFIG_CGROUPS: is not set when it should be. > * Please check to make sure these options are set correctly. > * Failure to do so may cause unexpected problems. > > > Gee, I can use top without cgroups support. I thought I might use htop > as well. Anyone knows why I _should_ use a kernel with cgroups > support? Just curious, not a big deal. I can do without htop if I > must. Well, it says "should be" enabled. It's not a requirement. You may not use some of htop's features like proper process grouping. > (I'm not suggesting that cgroups doesn't have valid use cases. But a > graphic version of top? Really? Please help me to understand. I want > to do the _correct_ thing, and I wouldn't want my dog to die for lack > of cgroups support.) I would be interested in why you wouldn't want to use cgroups. Besides being a requirement for systemd, it also has very valid use cases for other software you probably use: It allows portage to properly shut down remaining processes from ebuild build phases by knowing exactly which processes have been spawn in the compile phase, and it allows openrc to better manage the processes and proper shut down any processes belonging to a service. Also you may benefit from setting resource limits and fair resource sharing for a group of processes where ulimit applies only to single processes and doesn't know about resource shares at all. Overall, it makes sense to have it. -- Regards, Kai Replies to list-only preferred.
Re: [gentoo-user] htop wants cgroups
Hi, it's possible to use htop without the cgroup config in your kernel, but htop is able to display cgroups (which it obviously isn't able to if those aren't enabled in the kernel), so emerge throws this warning. If you don't want to display your cgroups in htop you don't need to change anything. Regards, Rasmus Sent from ProtonMail mobile Original Message On 30 Apr 2017, 18:26, Jorge Almeida wrote: Why? emerging htop yields this message: * CONFIG_CGROUPS: is not set when it should be. * Please check to make sure these options are set correctly. * Failure to do so may cause unexpected problems. Gee, I can use top without cgroups support. I thought I might use htop as well. Anyone knows why I _should_ use a kernel with cgroups support? Just curious, not a big deal. I can do without htop if I must. (I'm not suggesting that cgroups doesn't have valid use cases. But a graphic version of top? Really? Please help me to understand. I want to do the _correct_ thing, and I wouldn't want my dog to die for lack of cgroups support.) thanks Jorge Almeida
[gentoo-user] htop wants cgroups
Why? emerging htop yields this message: * CONFIG_CGROUPS: is not set when it should be. * Please check to make sure these options are set correctly. * Failure to do so may cause unexpected problems. Gee, I can use top without cgroups support. I thought I might use htop as well. Anyone knows why I _should_ use a kernel with cgroups support? Just curious, not a big deal. I can do without htop if I must. (I'm not suggesting that cgroups doesn't have valid use cases. But a graphic version of top? Really? Please help me to understand. I want to do the _correct_ thing, and I wouldn't want my dog to die for lack of cgroups support.) thanks Jorge Almeida
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gcc with graphite flag?
Hi, Graphite *can* improve the performance of some packages, but might worsen the performance of others. You might want to read through this thread: https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-1052716-start-0-postdays-0-postorder-asc-highlight-.html Personally, I enable it on a per package basis, python's performance gets a bit better with it. Regards, Rasmus Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email. Original Message Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gcc with graphite flag? Local Time: 30 April 2017 4:04 PM UTC Time: 30 April 2017 14:04 From: jo...@antarean.org To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org On Sunday, April 30, 2017 2:18:42 PM CEST Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > On 04/30/2017 05:25 AM, Walter Dnes wrote: > > So much for that wiki entry. BTW, I ended up putting... > > > > sys-devel/gcc graphite > > > > ...in package.use. The "graphite" USE flag means something entirely > > different for harfbuzz, i.e. build against media-libs/harfbuzz against > > media-gfx/graphite2 > > Btw, I don't think that USE flag is useful for anything, unless you put > the graphite optimization flags in your CFLAGS (-floop-interchange > -floop-strip-mine -floop-block). If you don't use those, there shouldn't > be a reason to enable the graphite flag. Is there any benefit from using graphite and these CFLAGS on a current Gentoo system? Using a simple google-search, I can't find anything recent. -- Joost
Re: [gentoo-user] How to get memtest onto a USB drive
On 04/29/2017 05:33 PM, Peter Humphrey wrote: > On Saturday 29 Apr 2017 08:57:35 Rasmus Thomsen wrote: >> Hello, >> >> actually had that screen happening to me too, but my hardware was fine. >> Could you try emerging the latest (unstable) memtest86+ package? >> Symlinking should work with that one. > >> Regards, >> Rasmus > > Nope. No can do, since the /boot partition is vfat, which can't handle soft > links. > > Here's a picture of the BIOS screen. This hardware is kaput. > Recently had a problem at work where this display corruption occurred, and it turned out to be a bad DVI cable. Dan
Re: [gentoo-user] How to get memtest onto a USB drive
On Sunday 30 Apr 2017 01:33:29 Peter Humphrey wrote: > On Saturday 29 Apr 2017 08:57:35 Rasmus Thomsen wrote: > > Hello, > > > > actually had that screen happening to me too, but my hardware was fine. > > Could you try emerging the latest (unstable) memtest86+ package? > > Symlinking should work with that one. > > > > Regards, > > Rasmus > > Nope. No can do, since the /boot partition is vfat, which can't handle soft > links. > > Here's a picture of the BIOS screen. This hardware is kaput. It may not be. Try re-seating the HDMI/DVI/VGA? cable between the PC and the monitor with the PC off. Then boot up and see it if persists. -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gcc with graphite flag?
On Sunday, April 30, 2017 2:18:42 PM CEST Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > On 04/30/2017 05:25 AM, Walter Dnes wrote: > > So much for that wiki entry. BTW, I ended up putting... > > > > sys-devel/gcc graphite > > > > ...in package.use. The "graphite" USE flag means something entirely > > different for harfbuzz, i.e. build against media-libs/harfbuzz against > > media-gfx/graphite2 > > Btw, I don't think that USE flag is useful for anything, unless you put > the graphite optimization flags in your CFLAGS (-floop-interchange > -floop-strip-mine -floop-block). If you don't use those, there shouldn't > be a reason to enable the graphite flag. Is there any benefit from using graphite and these CFLAGS on a current Gentoo system? Using a simple google-search, I can't find anything recent. -- Joost
[gentoo-user] Voice synthesizers? (not neccessarily TTS!)
Hi, I am looking for a (not neccessarily GENTOO) software, whith which it is possible to synthesize the human voice (male / female). It does not neccessarily need to be a TTS (I tried some) -- but the voice needs easily to be tuned in the sense of pitch and sound. Suppose you want a synthetic voice of Frodo talking some Tengwar (and dont want to mimic the movies actors ;) or the northern slang of some Elbish ... ;) Another example would be vocaloid (commercial product). Is there some software of this kind somewhere for Linux? Thanks a lot for any voice coming up for this ! :))) Cheers Meino
[gentoo-user] Re: gcc with graphite flag?
On 04/30/2017 05:25 AM, Walter Dnes wrote: So much for that wiki entry. BTW, I ended up putting... sys-devel/gcc graphite ...in package.use. The "graphite" USE flag means something entirely different for harfbuzz, i.e. build against media-libs/harfbuzz against media-gfx/graphite2 Btw, I don't think that USE flag is useful for anything, unless you put the graphite optimization flags in your CFLAGS (-floop-interchange -floop-strip-mine -floop-block). If you don't use those, there shouldn't be a reason to enable the graphite flag.
[gentoo-user] Can not compile arduino sketch after GCC upgrade
After upgrading GCC to 5.4.0 (from 4.9.3) I can no longer compile my sketches. At the end of the compile phase a get the following linker error: avr-gcc -Os -Wl,--gc-sections -mmcu=atmega32u4 -o /tmp/build881550966608502477.tmp/Blinky.cpp.elf /tmp/build881550966608502477.tmp/Blinky.cpp.o /tmp/build881550966608502477.tmp/FastLED313/hsv2rgb.cpp.o /tmp/build881550966608502477.tmp/FastLED313/wiring.cpp.o /tmp/build881550966608502477.tmp/FastLED313/colorutils.cpp.o /tmp/build881550966608502477.tmp/FastLED313/colorpalettes.cpp.o /tmp/build881550966608502477.tmp/FastLED313/lib8tion.cpp.o /tmp/build881550966608502477.tmp/FastLED313/FastLED.cpp.o /tmp/build881550966608502477.tmp/FastLED313/bitswap.cpp.o /tmp/build881550966608502477.tmp/FastLED313/power_mgt.cpp.o /tmp/build881550966608502477.tmp/FastLED313/noise.cpp.o /tmp/build881550966608502477.tmp/core.a -L/tmp/build881550966608502477.tmp -lm /usr/libexec/gcc/avr/ld: cannot find crtatmega32u4.o: No such file or directory /usr/libexec/gcc/avr/ld: cannot find -latmega32u4 collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status And sure enough, there is not "crtatmega32u4.o" on this system (and only one file with "atmega32u4" in the filename: /usr/lib64/gcc/avr/5.4.0/device-specs/specs-atmega32u4). I have tried to reinstall the avr-crossdev-toolchain: crossdev -C avr USE="-openmp -hardened -sanitize -vtv" crossdev -s4 -S --target avr ln -s /usr/lib64/binutils/avr/2.26.1/ldscripts /usr/avr/lib/ldscript And just to be sure I have also re-emerged: dev-embedded/avrdude dev-embedded/arduino Any suggestions what I am missing? -- D/\N *** This message is printed on 100% recycled electrons! *** 0x2FB894AD.asc Description: application/pgp-keys smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: [gentoo-user] clang <<==>> gcc ?
Rasmus.thomsen schrieb am So., 30. Apr. 2017, 12:19: > Hello, > > it's entirely possible to replace gcc for clang for *most* packages, > however some will not build currently and will require you to set up a > package.env file with entries for those packages (like described on clang's > wiki entry). Clang usually compiles faster than GCC does, but produces > slower binaries (at least for me). Also, clang offers flto=thin, which > doesn't require as much ram as gcc's lto > > Regards, > Rasmus > > > Sent from ProtonMail mobile > > > > Original Message > On 30 Apr 2017, 12:11, < tu...@posteo.de> wrote: > > > Hi, > > before I do a lot of reconfiguring, recompiling and finally > do the same thing again in the opposite direction: > > What are the experiences to replace gcc with clang for either > only userland tools or the whole system (with haveing gcc as > fallback)? > Is it worth the effort? > What are the benefits and the drawbacks? > > Thanks for any input in advance! > Cheers > Meino > > Hi, There is a tracking bug about what does not compile with clang. https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=408963 >
Re: [gentoo-user] clang <<==>> gcc ?
Hello, it's entirely possible to replace gcc for clang for *most* packages, however some will not build currently and will require you to set up a package.env file with entries for those packages (like described on clang's wiki entry). Clang usually compiles faster than GCC does, but produces slower binaries (at least for me). Also, clang offers flto=thin, which doesn't require as much ram as gcc's lto Regards, Rasmus Sent from ProtonMail mobile Original Message On 30 Apr 2017, 12:11, wrote: Hi, before I do a lot of reconfiguring, recompiling and finally do the same thing again in the opposite direction: What are the experiences to replace gcc with clang for either only userland tools or the whole system (with haveing gcc as fallback)? Is it worth the effort? What are the benefits and the drawbacks? Thanks for any input in advance! Cheers Meino
[gentoo-user] clang <<==>> gcc ?
Hi, before I do a lot of reconfiguring, recompiling and finally do the same thing again in the opposite direction: What are the experiences to replace gcc with clang for either only userland tools or the whole system (with haveing gcc as fallback)? Is it worth the effort? What are the benefits and the drawbacks? Thanks for any input in advance! Cheers Meino