Re: Logging of Changes
Thank you for the clarification/explanation! Best wishes, John -- | John Williams | joh...@ukgateway.net
Re: Logging of Changes
On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 09:50:28AM +, John Williams wrote: > > Why are there often series of changes which are not specifically logged at: > > http://ci.netsurf-browser.org/jenkins/view/All/job/netsurf/changes > > like in the last 13 builds. Does the information appear somewhere else? The "gap" builds are simply those triggered by other components (libraries). There are no code changes in NetSurf itself so no entry on this list. Most of the 13 you identify stem from recent fixes and improvements to librufl, libcss and toolchain updates. Though you may also see builds triggered from the CI system itself because I have been ensuring the system can successfully perform repeat builds. > > John > > -- > | John Williams > | joh...@ukgateway.net > > -- Regards Vincent http://www.kyllikki.org/
Logging of Changes
Why are there often series of changes which are not specifically logged at: http://ci.netsurf-browser.org/jenkins/view/All/job/netsurf/changes like in the last 13 builds. Does the information appear somewhere else? John -- | John Williams | joh...@ukgateway.net
Re: logging
Hi John [snip] Ok. Have you tried Vince's suggestion? Thanks for reminding me, Mark. I tried that suggestion some time ago but was unable to draw any conclusion. However, I will give it a longer test now. I have being trying that suggestion since your email and there does seem to be an improvement. However, I am now using vv r12147 and note the SNV comments, but also note that -v remains in the !Run file, which shows Revision: 11204. Is that an anomaly or is that line inert, because there seem to have been a further improvement with r12147? Brian
Re: logging
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 09:17 +0100, Brian Bailey wrote: Hi John [snip] Ok. Have you tried Vince's suggestion? Thanks for reminding me, Mark. I tried that suggestion some time ago but was unable to draw any conclusion. However, I will give it a longer test now. I have being trying that suggestion since your email and there does seem to be an improvement. However, I am now using vv r12147 and note the SNV comments, but also note that -v remains in the !Run file, It would; r12147 contained changes to the Windows frontend only. which shows Revision: 11204. Is that an anomaly or is that line inert, That is the last revision in which the !Run file changed. John.
Re: logging
Hi John [snip] Ok. Have you tried Vince's suggestion? Thanks for reminding me, Mark. I tried that suggestion some time ago but was unable to draw any conclusion. However, I will give it a longer test now. I have being trying that suggestion since your email and there does seem to be an improvement. However, I am now using vv r12147 and note the SNV comments, but also note that -v remains in the !Run file, It would; r12147 contained changes to the Windows frontend only. which shows Revision: 11204. Is that an anomaly or is that line inert, That is the last revision in which the !Run file changed. Well, OK, it just seems faster, irrespective! Brian
Re: logging
In article 1300871205.7641.16.camel@duiker, John-Mark Bell j...@netsurf-browser.org wrote: [snip] I guess that I must accept that my machine /is/ rather slow. But, as I am retired I can make endless cups of tea whilst things happen. 8-) I'm not sure you've told us what your machine is or what led you to believe that turning off logging would help. An A7000+. I didn't believe anything at all really, I just wanted to know. A bit like mt Everest I suppose, because it was there! Ok. Have you tried Vince's suggestion? Thanks for reminding me, Mark. I tried that suggestion some time ago but was unable to draw any conclusion. However, I will give it a longer test now. Brian
Re: logging
In article 20110321163550.gg4...@rjek.com, Rob Kendrick r...@netsurf-browser.org wrote: [snip] I am intrigued by the successive improvement and development of Netsurf. Periodically I load a personal favourite page in Wikepedia, just to see what changes are apparent in performance. It would seem that loading and rendering of that page does indeed vary. To what extent can one expect verbose logging to slow things down (I use a rather slow machine, which I am not going to change this side of Christmas). Is it possible to turn verbose logging on/off. Not tested, but in the !Run file near the bottom is the following line: Run NetSurf$Dir.!RunImage -v %*0 2Wimp$ScrapDir.WWW.NetSurf.Log If you put a | before the Wimp$ScrapDir.WWW.NetSurf.Log that should disable the logging. With a copy of r12120, I put a | before -v in the expectation that logging would be completely turned off. Three lines only were recorded in the log file, related to fonts, in this case. Unless their is anything in the Netsurf code itself that expects to write to the log it should work, but I'm offering no guarantees. Remove the -v flag. That is what enables verbose logging. Note that this simply stops NetSurf formatting and emitting the log data. It will still involve checking do I need to log this? Thanks, Rob. I also removed the -v flag, without putting an | anywhere. NetSurf seemed to be entirely stable in both cases. As far as I could tell, there was no discernible, subjective change in time in loading and rendering files, in either case. I guess that I must accept that my machine /is/ rather slow. But, as I am retired I can make endless cups of tea whilst things happen. 8-) Brian
Re: logging
On Tue, 2011-03-22 at 09:00 +, Brian Bailey wrote: In article 20110321163550.gg4...@rjek.com, Rob Kendrick r...@netsurf-browser.org wrote: Remove the -v flag. That is what enables verbose logging. Note that this simply stops NetSurf formatting and emitting the log data. It will still involve checking do I need to log this? Thanks, Rob. I also removed the -v flag, without putting an | anywhere. Commenting out bits of the !Run file using | is pretty much guaranteed to end in tears. Please don't do this. Additionally, disabling logging totally defeats the point of us asking for log files when you report a bug. NetSurf seemed to be entirely stable in both cases. As far as I could tell, there was no discernible, subjective change in time in loading and rendering files, in either case. It would be; logging simply isn't a significant proportion of runtime. NetSurf spends the vast majority of its time doing the things you'd expect (namely, fetching and rendering web pages). I guess that I must accept that my machine /is/ rather slow. But, as I am retired I can make endless cups of tea whilst things happen. 8-) I'm not sure you've told us what your machine is or what led you to believe that turning off logging would help. John.
Re: logging
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 09:00:17AM +, Brian Bailey wrote: In article 20110321163550.gg4...@rjek.com, Rob Kendrick r...@netsurf-browser.org wrote: [snip] I am intrigued by the successive improvement and development of Netsurf. Periodically I load a personal favourite page in Wikepedia, just to see what changes are apparent in performance. It would seem that loading and rendering of that page does indeed vary. To what extent can one expect verbose logging to slow things down (I use a rather slow machine, which I am not going to change this side of Christmas). Is it possible to turn verbose logging on/off. Not tested, but in the !Run file near the bottom is the following line: Run NetSurf$Dir.!RunImage -v %*0 2Wimp$ScrapDir.WWW.NetSurf.Log If you put a | before the Wimp$ScrapDir.WWW.NetSurf.Log that should disable the logging. With a copy of r12120, I put a | before -v in the expectation that logging would be completely turned off. Three lines only were recorded in the log file, related to fonts, in this case. Unless their is anything in the Netsurf code itself that expects to write to the log it should work, but I'm offering no guarantees. Remove the -v flag. That is what enables verbose logging. Note that this simply stops NetSurf formatting and emitting the log data. It will still involve checking do I need to log this? Thanks, Rob. I also removed the -v flag, without putting an | anywhere. NetSurf seemed to be entirely stable in both cases. As far as I could tell, there was no discernible, subjective change in time in loading and rendering files, in either case. I guess that I must accept that my machine /is/ rather slow. But, as I am retired I can make endless cups of tea whilst things happen. 8-) Out of interest what speed do you get if you set incremental_reflow:0 in the Choices file? It may be a case your hardware really is simply too slow to support that feature and is spending so long redrawing that it is not spending long enough fetching.. -- Regards Vincent http://www.kyllikki.org/
Re: logging
In article 1300785359.7641.12.camel@duiker, John-Mark Bell j...@netsurf-browser.org wrote: [snip] Remove the -v flag. That is what enables verbose logging. Note that this simply stops NetSurf formatting and emitting the log data. It will still involve checking do I need to log this? Thanks, Rob. I also removed the -v flag, without putting an | anywhere. Commenting out bits of the !Run file using | is pretty much guaranteed to end in tears. Please don't do this. OK, I won't, in future. It was a kind of one off thing. Additionally, disabling logging totally defeats the point of us asking for log files when you report a bug. I realised that, thanks, but wanted to see if logging had any significant effect on file loading and rendering. Equally, if it had worked logging could also be turned back on again in extremis. NetSurf seemed to be entirely stable in both cases. As far as I could tell, there was no discernible, subjective change in time in loading and rendering files, in either case. It would be; logging simply isn't a significant proportion of runtime. NetSurf spends the vast majority of its time doing the things you'd expect (namely, fetching and rendering web pages). Yes, I now realise! I guess that I must accept that my machine /is/ rather slow. But, as I am retired I can make endless cups of tea whilst things happen. 8-) I'm not sure you've told us what your machine is or what led you to believe that turning off logging would help. An A7000+. I didn't believe anything at all really, I just wanted to know. A bit like mt Everest I suppose, because it was there! Um, I am unlikely to replace my machine until hell freezes over and I just wondered if it could be provoked into making NetSurf a smidgion faster. Brian
Re: logging
In message 51b749bbd1bbai...@argonet.co.uk Brian Bailey bbai...@argonet.co.uk wrote: I am intrigued by the successive improvement and development of Netsurf. Periodically I load a personal favourite page in Wikepedia, just to see what changes are apparent in performance. It would seem that loading and rendering of that page does indeed vary. To what extent can one expect verbose logging to slow things down (I use a rather slow machine, which I am not going to change this side of Christmas). Is it possible to turn verbose logging on/off. Not tested, but in the !Run file near the bottom is the following line: Run NetSurf$Dir.!RunImage -v %*0 2Wimp$ScrapDir.WWW.NetSurf.Log If you put a | before the Wimp$ScrapDir.WWW.NetSurf.Log that should disable the logging. Unless their is anything in the Netsurf code itself that expects to write to the log it should work, but I'm offering no guarantees. Just out of interest, could someone clarify, please. -- Kev Wells http://riscos.kevsoft.co.uk/ http://kevsoft.co.uk/ http://kevsoft.co.uk/AleQuest/ ICQ 238580561 And did those feet in ancient time
Re: logging
In article afd383b751.ke...@talktalk.net, Kevin Wells kevinwe...@talktalk.net wrote: In message 51b749bbd1bbai...@argonet.co.uk Brian Bailey bbai...@argonet.co.uk wrote: I am intrigued by the successive improvement and development of Netsurf. Periodically I load a personal favourite page in Wikepedia, just to see what changes are apparent in performance. It would seem that loading and rendering of that page does indeed vary. To what extent can one expect verbose logging to slow things down (I use a rather slow machine, which I am not going to change this side of Christmas). Is it possible to turn verbose logging on/off. Not tested, but in the !Run file near the bottom is the following line: Run NetSurf$Dir.!RunImage -v %*0 2Wimp$ScrapDir.WWW.NetSurf.Log If you put a | before the Wimp$ScrapDir.WWW.NetSurf.Log that should disable the logging. Thanks, Kevin. I was looking for something like that but just couldn't see it. I'll give it a go. Hope that it doesn't explode! Unless their is anything in the Netsurf code itself that expects to write to the log it should work, but I'm offering no guarantees. Just out of interest, could someone clarify, please.
logging
I am intrigued by the successive improvement and development of Netsurf. Periodically I load a personal favourite page in Wikepedia, just to see what changes are apparent in performance. It would seem that loading and rendering of that page does indeed vary. To what extent can one expect verbose logging to slow things down (I use a rather slow machine, which I am not going to change this side of Christmas). Is it possible to turn verbose logging on/off. Just out of interest, could someone clarify, please.
