Re: gdb: No symbol table info available

On Sat, 09 Dec 2017 20:42:46 +0100, Richard Shaw wrote: > Any tips? A correct backtrace would have replaced your line #10 0x in ?? () with line #10 0x0040043a in _start () but otherwise everything would be all the same. Tips in general for segfaults are valgrind. Or

Re: gdb: No symbol table info available

On Sat, 09 Dec 2017 19:13:24 +0100, Richard Shaw wrote: > #9 0x7621f891 in __libc_start_main (main=0x0, argc=0, argv=0x0, > init=, fini=, rtld_fini=, > stack_end=0x0) at ../csu/libc-start.c:329 > result = > unwind_buf = {cancel_jmp_buf = {{jmp_buf = {4309931, 0,

Re: remote X connections

On Thu, 30 Nov 2017 13:39:16 +0100, Christian Groessler wrote: > This is handled by conditional compilation in gdm (depending on a > HAVE_XSERVER_THAT_DEFAULTS_TO_LOCAL_ONLY define). gdm ignores DisallowTCP=false on F22 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1226084 FYI I had a problem with

Re: Call for testing - Firefox 57

On Fri, 17 Nov 2017 19:53:43 +0100, Randy Barlow wrote: > On 11/16/2017 11:50 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > (I don't understand why we package Firefox addons at all, it seems like > > a silly idea. But oh well.) > > I personally like the idea of packaging addons, for the same reasons I > like

Re: mingw-find-debuginfo.sh: objcopy strip-unneeded vs strip-debug?

On Thu, 24 Aug 2017 21:51:59 +0200, Sandro Mani wrote: > May well be mistaken, but doesn't ABRT work with coredumps, which you can't > get on Windows systems? OK, thanks for showing me the setup. I was still imagining running PE32 binaries by Wine, I did not realize there exist real Windows

Re: mingw-find-debuginfo.sh: objcopy strip-unneeded vs strip-debug?

On Thu, 24 Aug 2017 21:36:29 +0200, Sandro Mani wrote: > While I'm at it, my current technique for interpreting mingw stacktraces > produced without debuginfos is parsing the text and calling addr2line for > each stack frame. Is there a neater technique? Unaware of. But then why you do not have

Re: mingw-find-debuginfo.sh: objcopy strip-unneeded vs strip-debug?

On Thu, 24 Aug 2017 14:31:11 +0200, Sandro Mani wrote: > On 24.08.2017 14:18, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > > On Thu, 24 Aug 2017 13:43:32 +0200, Sandro Mani wrote: > > > I'm investigating why gdb returns so unreliable backtraces for mingw > > > binaries without debugin

Re: mingw-find-debuginfo.sh: objcopy strip-unneeded vs strip-debug?

On Thu, 24 Aug 2017 13:43:32 +0200, Sandro Mani wrote: > I'm investigating why gdb returns so unreliable backtraces for mingw > binaries without debuginfos, They are perfectly reliable. They just do not show the function names. But those can be looked up later from *-debuginfo.rpm. ... >

Re: debuginfo/source improvements vs mass rebuild

On Mon, 31 Jul 2017 13:16:29 +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote: > - Putting extra files under /usr/lib/debug causes: > error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: > > /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/__pycache__/libpython3.6dm.so.1.0.debug-gdb.cpython-36.opt-1.pyc > >

Re: Starting an x86_32 SIG

On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 20:32:57 +0200, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > 2. A formal statement as requested by some users about the architecture > 3. A survey of problems on the architecture. > 4. A hardware selection the SIG are going to focus on. > 5. What product the SIG is planning to deliver. Just

Re: Static libraries in Fedora distribution (Was: Re: [Help Wanted] PPC64LE build for thrift) [resent]

On Fri, 17 Mar 2017 15:40:34 +0100, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > (Resending below as looks like I've replied only to Jan) also resending On Fri, 17 Mar 2017 06:18:56 +0100, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > I saw already such tweaks in many Fedora specs %check sections. > IMO such %ifing inside or around

Re: Static libraries in Fedora distribution (Was: Re: [Help Wanted] PPC64LE build for thrift)

On Fri, 17 Mar 2017 06:18:56 +0100, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > I saw already such tweaks in many Fedora specs %check sections. > IMO such %ifing inside or around %check is incorrect/not needed and can be > removed. > Why? Because: > - all possible to use package tests should be by default enabled > -

Re: Static libraries in Fedora distribution (Was: Re: [Help Wanted] PPC64LE build for thrift)

On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 01:32:06 +0100, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > OK here is full list of spec files which have glibc-static in BuildRequires: > > ./g/gdb.git/gdb.spec:BuildRequires: glibc-static%{bits_local} This is a false positive as it is enclosed by: %if 0%{?_with_testsuite:1} I have no

Re: overriding CXX_FLAGS

On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 10:54:32 +0100, Mattia Verga wrote: > I must ask developers why they recommend to use c++11 and then they set it > fixed to gnu++11 gnu++11 is a superset of c++11 so that should work either. Older GCCs defaulted to c++98, they may mean the project requires compiler

Re: Bluetooth headsets vs rawhide

On Mon, 23 Jan 2017 00:52:07 +0100, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > If I switch them to HSP/HFP I get no > audio in or out. Apps that try and use them just hang. linphone sometimes hangs for me so I have to fix it by: # rm -f /usr/bin/pulseaudio;killall pulseaudio Without that 'rm' pulseaudio just

Re: debuginfo updates: RFE for dnf?

On Fri, 13 Jan 2017 19:26:16 +0100, Przemek Klosowski wrote: > Are you saying that currently it updates them completely independently? Yes. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

Re: debuginfo updates: RFE for dnf?

On Fri, 13 Jan 2017 18:16:18 +0100, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > Probably because debuginfo files are very large and you might not want to > waste > bandwidth keeping them updated. (Just guessing here) Also the repos are commonly out of sync so some packages have N+1 binary rpm while other

Re: Decompress debug-info compressed by dwz

On Tue, 27 Dec 2016 13:27:02 +0100, Andrey Ponomarenko wrote: > Hello, Is there a way to decompress the > debug-info compressed by dwz? The issue is that all > compile units in the DWARF dump may depend on each other in the compressed > debug-info and they can't be analyzed independently for this

Re: Creating cores in f25

On Sun, 18 Dec 2016 17:26:40 +0100, Steve Dickson wrote: > How do I get f25 to create cores, these days? echo >/etc/sysctl.d/foo.conf "kernel.core_pattern=core"; reboot It gets broken by: /usr/lib/sysctl.d/50-coredump.conf $ rpm -qf /usr/lib/sysctl.d/50-coredump.conf

Re: dnf should not update debuginfo if not updating packgages

On Sat, 05 Nov 2016 05:20:10 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Because -debuginfo is per SRPM, not per subpackage, so you can need the > -debuginfo without having all subpackages (or even the main package) > installed. There could be for example: Conflicts: %{name} != %{version}-%{release} But that

Re: Critpath flags on Emacs and Guile

On Fri, 21 Oct 2016 13:18:38 +0200, Peter Robinson wrote: > guild would be because it's a dep of a dep of gdb-headless guile libguile-2.0.so.22 is DT_NEEDED - as shown by ldd. Easy way would be to make gdb-headless a separate binary/build. Less easy way would be to dlopen() libguile from gdb

Re: GDB: Recommends vs. Suggests and abrt->gdb->gcc dependency

Hi Jakub, On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 09:57:24 +0200, Jakub Filak wrote: > However, I thinking we can resolve this issue on packaging level. We just > need to introduce a new package shipping the core gdb functionality and make > ABRT dependent on it. The new package should not ship /usr/bin/gdb but

GDB: Recommends vs. Suggests and abrt->gdb->gcc dependency

Hi, there have been submitted these Bugs: Drop the gcc dependency https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1195005 gdb pulls in devel packages (gcc, kernel-headers, etc.) [former Summary] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1306591 due to recent GDBs

Re: Show warnings from a C/C++ build

On Fri, 15 Jul 2016 22:46:23 +0200, Jerry James wrote: > Attached is a little script I use when doing a mock build with gcc or > g++, to see what warnings the compiler emitted. I usually ignore > -Wunused* warnings, as those aren't usually dangerous, but I pay > attention to -Wstrict-aliasing,

Re: multi-CPU optimization inside a distribution

On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 16:13:59 +0200, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 9:53 AM, Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratoch...@redhat.com> > wrote: > > But now there is ppc64le for >=Power8. So <=Power7 can use ppc64 but newer > >>=Power8 hardware does use ppc64le

Re: multi-CPU optimization inside a distribution

On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 12:12:37 +0200, Dan Horák wrote: > For ppc64 (the big endian POWER) the base is set by the toolchain > default which is Power4/ppc970. When Power7 came we were asked what are > the options to take the advantage of these CPUs, 3 generations newer > than the base. The solution

Re: Hacks for multilib unclean C headers

find the separate .h files for each arch only as a last resort hack. And thus I find it not preferred to make a last resort hack a part of the standard packaging macros. Jan Kratochvil (*) Why not - it would be probably rejected upstream as too "new"; although this patch also was

Re: Firefox not working anymore over ssh?

On Sat, 02 Apr 2016 09:39:33 +0200, drago01 wrote: > On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 9:26 AM, Samuel Sieb wrote: > > On 04/02/2016 12:20 AM, drago01 wrote: > >> Also XWayland only supports DRI3; > > > > You say it's currently fixed by falling back to DRI2, but then you say that > > DRI2

Re: Firefox not working anymore over ssh?

On Tue, 29 Mar 2016 19:22:31 +0200, Tim Landscheidt wrote: > Michael Catanzaro wrote: > > Then it was probably broken by this update: > > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-606ca05253 > > The "LIBGL_DRI3_DISABLE=1" workaround fixed it for me as > well

Re: IPv6 application test suite – call for participation

to add '--allowerasing' to command line to replace conflicting packages) on Fedora 23 x86_64 Jan Kratochvil -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: hawkey replaced by libhif, DNF into C initiative started

On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 18:03:52 +0100, David Malcolm wrote: > I think I'm only semi-serious here [1], but have you considered Rust? > [1] e.g. it's not yet in Fedora. or proven C++11(/14/17)? (it is already in Fedora) Jan -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Couldn't find DIE referenced by DW_OP_GNU_implicit_pointer

On Wed, 24 Feb 2016 17:59:29 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote: > Hello, > What $subject means ? , should I be worried ?  > > Only happens in rawhide , I think is GCC6 warning.   Google found that message in: https://ppisar.fedorapeople.org/perl_rebuild/scratch/latest/packages/perl-version/build.log

Re: GCC 6 -Wnonnull is too aggressive

On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 13:07:53 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > But I say, there should not be any room for -Werror in production > SW/packages. > > The fact, > * different version of gcc raise different warnings > * gcc on different architectures raise different warnings. > * gcc raises warnings on

Re: GCC 6 -Wnonnull is too aggressive

On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 18:25:29 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > Remove -Werror. [...] > -Werror is useful to devs when actively working on code, but using it in > released production code to be used in packages is plain st***. -Werror has found me many times bugs in Fedora add-on patches not being up

Re: Debugging practices and hardened packages

On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 19:16:33 +0100, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > so you could well have an update that isn't the current one that has no > debuginfo on mirrors, but you could always get it from koji. If you have only a core file you know build-ids dumped there but not NVRAs. build-id -> NVRA mapping was

Re: Debugging practices and hardened packages

On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 18:12:44 +0100, Roman Tsisyk wrote: > How long debuginfo packages are stored in repositories? > For example, someone may have an old version of package for which debuginfo > already has gone. > How to debug in this case? ABRT retrace server has some storage and infrastructure

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 16:37:01 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > A developer who wants to build a 32-bit program on x86_64 might not > be in the mock group. Their system administrator might not want to Aren't the multiuser systems a history now with VPSes or even just containers cheaper than a

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 23:24:13 +0100, Ian Malone wrote: > and shifting data in and out is more awkward than working directly on it. Mock has bind_mount* plugin for that. Jan -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On Wed, 20 Jan 2016 23:59:01 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Wed, 20 Jan 2016 21:59:01 +0100, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > > On Wed, 20 Jan 2016 16:50:03 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > However on the same host if you do: > > > > > > dnf install gtk3-

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On Wed, 20 Jan 2016 16:50:03 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > However on the same host if you do: > > dnf install gtk3-devel.i686 > > then there's a lot missing before you can compile a 32 bit Gtk3 > application[2]. There were always missing many %{?_isa} in BuildRequires, I was filing many

Re: F24 System Wide Change: Change Proposal Name NewRpmDBFormat

On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 09:42:17 +0100, Dan Horák wrote: > On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 09:24:36 +0100 Tomáš Smetana wrote: > > On Wed, 13 Jan 2016 14:38:08 +0100 Florian Festi wrote: > > I tend to use systemd-nspawn containers for building rpms. So for > > example, I

Re: Debugging practices and hardened packages

On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 11:39:23 +0100, Roman Tsisyk wrote: > -debuginfo should be for the same build version as a binary itself. > Most users never install -debuginfo. GDB instructs them they should: $ gdb -q xvinfo Reading symbols from xvinfo...Reading symbols from /root/xvinfo...(no debugging

Re: ELF arch question

On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 15:42:48 +0100, Orion Poplawski wrote: > I want BLAS/LAPACK implementations to do something like: > > %if > Provides: libblas.so.3()(64bit) > %else > Provides: libblas.so.3 > %endif https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2015-August/213021.html %if %{__isa_bits} =

Re: Easier %config management?

On Sun, 13 Dec 2015 05:58:47 +0100, Christopher wrote: > For example, I can see which %config files have changed with `rpm -V`, but > I can't see what the changes actually are unless I do `dnf download > $myrpm`, extract it, and diff them. Using this script of mine. It keeps original unchanged

Re: DNF could improve messages about package auto-removal

On Thu, 03 Dec 2015 22:13:56 +0100, James Antill wrote: > 2) Change the config. from the current gamble of save $0.0001 of disk > space on the upside, It is not about saving the disk space but about manageable number of config and binary files on your system. When I search for something I

Re: How to remove old source file?

On Sat, 14 Nov 2015 11:41:32 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > The "sources" file is maintained within the git repository There is also ".gitignore" file which is sometimes unmaintained and huge. Jan -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: How to remove old source file?

On Sat, 14 Nov 2015 17:27:04 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > A less-known feature of fedpkg is that if you add wildcards to > .gitignore, then fedpkg does the right thing and will not add new > entries to .gitignore each time you upload a file. That's IMO not right because then you have left

Re: make unmaintained ??

On Sun, 25 Oct 2015 01:07:47 +0200, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > I built 4.1 for rawhide. If that checks out to be OK, I can push > an update for F23 also. I do not understand why a major rebase could be permitted after all the F-23 freezing stages? It may cause FTBFSes or even broken

Re: To someone with power to push packages on Fedora 21

On Sun, 18 Oct 2015 22:03:43 +0200, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Sun, 18 Oct 2015 21:14:25 +0200 Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratoch...@redhat.com> > wrote: > > > That is a Bug of Bodhi, the URLs should be more descriptive. > > (I have not filed it.) > > I thought it wa

Re: To someone with power to push packages on Fedora 21

On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 14:56:11 +0200, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 10/15/2015 06:49 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-11787 > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-4638 [...] > >

Re: How to make .spec Requires for libXXX.so.VER

On Tue, 29 Sep 2015 14:32:06 +0200, Sérgio Basto wrote: > On Seg, 2015-09-28 at 09:11 +0200, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > > This works for Requires (or Recommends) but not for BuildRequires: > > Sorry if it is off-topic ... > I got a similar question, I just tested and the followi

Re: How to make .spec Requires for libXXX.so.VER

On Sat, 01 Aug 2015 21:48:24 +0200, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > On Sat, Aug 1, 2015 at 10:25 PM, Jan Kratochvil > <jan.kratoch...@redhat.com> wrote: > > (1) How to make a dependency on librpm.so.7? > > > > librpm.so.7 is in rpm-libs-4.12.90-3.fc24.x86_64 which --pro

Re: How to make .spec Requires for libXXX.so.VER

On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 10:54:17 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: Why do you use dlopen for such essential system libraries? Why not link to them directly? https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2015-August/213029.html Message-ID: 20150802073308.ga15...@host1.jankratochvil.net -- devel

Re: How to make .spec Requires for libXXX.so.VER

On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 08:35:46 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 08/01/2015 09:25 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote: (1) How to make a dependency on librpm.so.7? librpm.so.7 is in rpm-libs-4.12.90-3.fc24.x86_64 which --provides: librpm.so.7()(64bit) librpmio.so.7()(64bit) rpm-libs

Re: How to make .spec Requires for libXXX.so.VER

On Sat, 01 Aug 2015 21:48:24 +0200, Igor Gnatenko wrote: I'd propose to add something like: %if %{__isa_bits} = 64 Requires: libFOO.so.X()(64bit) %else Requires: libFOO.so.X %endif Thanks, used that. __isa_bits is 32 even on s390 (sometimes called as 31-bit). Jan Kratochvil -- devel

Re: How to make .spec Requires for libXXX.so.VER

On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 13:54:58 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: I still don't get it. If librpm's SONAME changes between Fedora releases, these libs will be call incompatible, no matter if they will be dlopen'ed or linked directly. The librpm functionality in GDB is very marginal one. For normal

Re: How to make .spec Requires for libXXX.so.VER

to it anyway: http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/gdb.git/tree/gdb-6.6-buildid-locate-rpm-librpm-workaround.patch https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=643031 Jan Kratochvil -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code

How to make .spec Requires for libXXX.so.VER

Hi, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1249325 GDB requires some library libXXX.so.3 by dlopen(). Therefore it is not found by rpm automatic requires/provides from DT_NEEDED. Therefore one has to add the libXXX.so.3 by specific BuildRequires and Requires to the .spec file. libXXX is

Re: Differences between Koji and mock buildroots

On Thu, 14 May 2015 11:09:08 +0200, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote: Yesterday gdb package introduced Remommends: dnf-plugins-core in rawhide [1]. gdb is required by rpm-build, which is a default package in Koji f23 build group. As a consequence minimal f23-build buildroot installed with DNF (default

Re: Roaming, and libresolv being stuck in the 1980's mindset

On Sat, 18 Apr 2015 21:49:57 +0200, Philip Prindeville wrote: I recently opened a bug with glibc because persistent programs (like Thunderbird, etc) don't seem to handle roaming onto different networks very well. dnf install bind-chroot, enable it, start it echo /etc/resolv.conf nameserver

Re: dnf debug-info-install

On Wed, 08 Apr 2015 09:52:46 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: 2) In days of virtualization, containers, vagrant, etc your runtime environment is not necessary directly your development machine. Yes, Gary Benson is working on integrating gdbserver and GDB for these scenarios. Although I am not sure

dnf debuginfo-install [Re: dnf debug-info-install]

On Tue, 07 Apr 2015 14:25:32 +0200, Michael Catanzaro wrote: Because gdb recommends you use it whenever it detects that debuginfo is missing. :-) Then the process for figuring out how to install it is unnecessarily complex; I have filed+discussed that it is really complex to find dnf

Re: dnf debug-info-install

On Tue, 07 Apr 2015 14:51:49 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: Dne 7.4.2015 v 14:25 Michael Catanzaro napsal(a): On Tue, 2015-04-07 at 14:15 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: Dne 7.4.2015 v 14:09 Michael Catanzaro napsal(a): I want 'dnf debug-info-install' to be available by default on Workstation.

Re: dnf replacing yum and dnf-yum

On Thu, 02 Apr 2015 09:50:05 +0200, Jiří Konečný wrote: When I'm using this command I get information which package contains this library. $ yum provides *libnetapi.so but when I'm using dnf command $ dnf repoquery --provides *libnetapi.so Besides other replies to make it clear: There is a

Re: Results of a test mass rebuild of rawhide/x86_64 with gcc-5.0.0-0.5.fc22

On Sun, 08 Feb 2015 18:17:56 +0100, Marek Polacek wrote: gdb-7.8.50.20150108-1.fc22.src.rpm Fixed/rebuilt, upstream not really affected. http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/gdb.git/commit/?id=5d84d7a16acc0469b6829f276987cf74e10ae848 Jan -- devel mailing list

Re: no error handling in Yum any more?

On Mon, 22 Dec 2014 05:59:50 +0100, Felix Miata wrote: I started a yum upgrade process. When it reached 342/784 (@avahi) over half an hour ago, the screen writing from the process simply halted. During F20-F21 upgrade I had to run along something like while sleep 1;do killall

Re: no error handling in Yum any more?

On Mon, 22 Dec 2014 18:20:01 +0100, Tom Hughes wrote: The fix is to kill the dbus-daemon process - after that the systemctl calls will still fail but will do so quickly rather than slowly. OK, goot to know. You will also won't be able to do a clean reboot so will have to resort to something

Re: no error handling in Yum any more?

On Mon, 22 Dec 2014 18:28:58 +0100, Tom Hughes wrote: The evidence to look for to see if you are hitting this problem is messages in the journal like this: Dec 05 09:08:21 gosford.compton.nu systemd[1]: Assertion 'path' failed at ../src/shared/cgroup-util.c:913, function

Re: Fedora Installation Needs Intelligence

On Fri, 12 Dec 2014 01:37:52 +0100, john.tiger wrote: 2) If key requirement is missing / insufficient then pop suggestion - if it's a non shipping proprietary issue, then provide popup dialog info and links to get problem solved - none of the current go look it up - needs the right info right

Re: Fedora Installation Needs Intelligence

On Fri, 12 Dec 2014 08:17:45 +0100, Satyajit Sahoo wrote: Wireless is a requirement for laptops. For example, Macbook Air doesn't have an ethernet port. s/requirement for laptops/requirement for Macbook Air/ Sure the installer could be improved but slightly differently (soft warning if there

Re: Power consumption with Fedora

On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 06:30:57 +0100, Nathanael d. Noblet wrote: I don't know much about it but I hate how bad my battery life is on my laptop... My 3 years old Lenovo X220 lasts for 12 hours (powertop reports so) on Fedora 20 x86_64 with powertop --auto-tune. According to powertop approx. 5.5W

Re: Entire process's environment attached to bugzillas by ABRT

On Thu, 27 Nov 2014 16:23:57 +0100, Jakub Filak wrote: Do you find 'environ' attachment valuable or is ABRT just publishing personal information? No but I can imagine in some cases it may be useful. Couldn't there be a way to send additional information upon bug assignee's request? That would

Re: Abotu setting 'PermitRootLogin=no' in sshd_config

On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 08:11:27 +0100, P J P wrote: Does it make sense to disable remote root login by default? If so, do we need to just report it to the maintainer or it would be treated as a feature? Almost all of my Fedora installations are test VMs where any security is irrelevant. Just my

Re: Odd debugedit message: -b arg has to be either the same length as -d arg, or more than 1 char longer

On Fri, 04 Jul 2014 18:01:00 +0200, David Howells wrote: I'm seeing this message: extracting debug info from /home/dhowells/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/cross-gcc-4.9.0-2.fc21.x86_64/usr/lib/gcc/hppa-linux-gnu/4.9.0/libcloog-isl.so.4 /usr/lib/rpm/debugedit: -b arg has to be either the same length as

Re: fedoras default cflags clang

On Sat, 31 May 2014 00:31:50 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: As of 2014, I only know two cases where clang is still better: more complete caret diagnostics, and better recovery from invalid types (clang provides suggestions and uses it for the rest of the compilation to avoid cascaded error

Re: SSD disk over Fedora 20... ?

On Fri, 14 Mar 2014 01:24:37 +0100, Digimer wrote: I've been using an SSD in my laptop since Fedora 16 without issue. I used luks encryption, so I can't benefit from TRIM, You can but that is for users@ list and off-topic here, crypttab has option 'discard'. Jan -- devel mailing list

Re: Out of virtual memory on ARM builder

On Fri, 14 Feb 2014 17:16:48 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: Can you choose it based on something like the output of `free -m` and/or `grep -i bogomips /proc/cpuinfo` ? That would not be great, it would make build results unreproducible (=the testsuite results) on different build hosts. Jan

Re: Disabling ABRT?

On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 13:17:49 +0100, Richard Fearn wrote: On 29 December 2013 11:29, Brendan Jones brendan.jones...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks. I had tried this but still no core in the executing directory. Now I'm not sure where they are going - certainly nowhere in $HOME. Could be a couple

Re: debuginfo packages available in updates later than regular packages.

On Tue, 26 Nov 2013 11:39:38 +0100, Sandro Mani wrote: Here is a quick and dirty spec implementing the idea I described: [1]. From what I can see it behaves correctly with any combination of packages and subpackages installed. Am I missing something? [1]

Re: debuginfo packages available in updates later than regular packages.

On Sun, 24 Nov 2013 16:50:51 +0100, Sandro Mani wrote: A nice solution to ensure consistency could be to have each debuginfo package require the exact version of the base package installed. Since the debuginfo package however cannot know which base (sub)package it should depend on, I wonder

Re: Differences between Fakeroot and Mock Suggested method

On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 01:07:15 +0200, Adam Williamson wrote: generate the SRPM and do 'koji build --scratch fXX blah.src.rpm' , where You would have to rpmbuild -bs *.spec first to get blash.src.rpm. It is done all by: fedpkg build --scratch --srpm The problem is that it uploads the whole

Re: prelink performance gains

On Thu, 17 Oct 2013 00:16:35 +0200, Robert Relyea wrote: prelink throws rocks at a lot of packages that have to check the integrity of the shared libraries they are using. It provides no real useful way of assisting in those tasks, It provides 'prelink -y' only for exactly that purpose. There

Re: prelink performance gains

On Thu, 17 Oct 2013 16:28:07 +0200, Josh Boyer wrote: On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 7:22 AM, Paul Wouters pwout...@redhat.com wrote: On Thu, 17 Oct 2013, Jan Kratochvil wrote: I agree there remains some work on prelink itself and some packages around to make prelink relevant again I don't

Re: prelink performance gains

On Tue, 15 Oct 2013 23:51:18 +0200, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote: $ rpm -V libreoffice-core prelink: /tmp/#prelink#.TZlaPL: Recorded 92 dependencies, now seeing -1 Repeating for the third time in this thread: This is a known prelink Bug and you can find the single line fix/workaround there:

Re: prelink performance gains [summary]

On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 09:20:02 +0200, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote: I understand, but what bothers me isn't the prelink bug but prelink itself being installed by default (for what it does regardless of the bug). What exactly bothers you? It (generally) speeds up programs startup. As a summary I see

Re: prelink performance gains

On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 11:56:44 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: So even in that totally artificial case, we gain very little, considering the trouble that prelink is. After all the discussion I have listed the current known issues: prelink performance gains [summary]

Re: prelink performance gains

On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 14:45:00 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: why waste time and energy to fix things with little to no benefit IIRC compiler team spends 1.5 year to get 1% of performane gain. Here you have almost ready feature with up to ... questionable but it is in a range of percents in some real

Re: prelink performance gains

On Tue, 15 Oct 2013 16:21:01 +0200, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: To justify removing it, we just need to collect data to show that those performance benefits no longer exist, with current hardware and software combination in Fedora. That is what this email thread is seeking to confirm. There is

Re: prelink performance gains

On Tue, 15 Oct 2013 16:59:59 +0200, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: I wouldn't read that as saying that prelink is slowing down startup, rather that the benefit of prelink is so small as to be indistinguishable from the background noise. That's the problem we even disagree how to read the numbers.

Re: prelink performance gains

On Tue, 15 Oct 2013 17:04:05 +0200, Matthew Miller wrote: But, since prelink presents other problems on its own, Prelinked system is a good test for tools like GDB, elfutils and others they can properly handle the displacements of sections/segments. This is something that ELF does not forbid so

Re: prelink performance gains

On Tue, 15 Oct 2013 18:27:23 +0200, Dhiru Kholia wrote: In spite of this fact, I believe that they are enough to demonstrate that prelink is not resulting in any big gains anymore. Nobody says prelink brings _big_ gains. It is just a negligible performance and negligible battery optimization

Re: prelink performance gains

On Tue, 15 Oct 2013 19:42:25 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: * look at the amount of updates and how they hit prelinked libraries until prelink ran again * look at the lsof | grep DEL | grep /usr output caused by prelink Sorry I do not see what disadvantage is it? * look at the wasted cycles

Re: prelink performance gains

On Tue, 15 Oct 2013 19:50:44 +0200, Simo Sorce wrote: Many tools need to juggle the fact these binaries have been changed, and make checkers more complex and prone to faults. So let's build the whole system with -O0 and we can throw away most of compilers and half of debuggers, which are all

Re: prelink performance gains

On Tue, 15 Oct 2013 19:54:21 +0200, Chris Adams wrote: Now you are wasting a chunk of RAM, as it can't be shared between non-prelinked and prelinked bins/libs. OK, yes. I believe with RAM prices and therefore RAM sizes nowadays you will still have overall better system performance with

Re: prelink performance gains

On Tue, 15 Oct 2013 19:54:15 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: have fun in distinct between prelink caused needs-restarting or real This is a bug of update system it does not know if an updated service needs restarting or not. your notebooks are running 24 hours a day? really? OT: Yes, really. I

Re: prelink performance gains

On Tue, 15 Oct 2013 20:24:06 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 15.10.2013 20:07, schrieb Jan Kratochvil: This is a bug of update system it does not know if an updated service needs restarting or not. you can always point with your finger somewhere else the better way is solve the root cause

Re: prelink performance gains

On Tue, 15 Oct 2013 20:25:10 +0200, Paul Wouters wrote: - complexity - complicated prelink blacklists - complicated cron job exclusion with sysconfig You can always make your software development life more simple by giving up on some useful feature. That -O2 vs. -O0 build is a good

Re: prelink performance gains

On Tue, 15 Oct 2013 20:54:06 +0200, Chris Adams wrote: Since you keep repeating this one: -O2 vs. -O0 has a significant performance gain. The message that started this thread indicates that prelink may not have a significant gain anymore. If that's the case, than _any_ effort is not worth

Re: prelink performance gains

On Tue, 15 Oct 2013 21:08:40 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 15.10.2013 21:05, schrieb Jan Kratochvil: It depends, for example in this case prelink saves 33% of time (and battery): i=0;time while [ $i -lt 1000 ];do /usr/bin/gnome-open --help /dev/null;i=$[$i+1];done where

Re: prelink performance gains

On Tue, 15 Oct 2013 21:10:34 +0200, Chris Adams wrote: Do you really run gnome-open --help 1000 times per reasonable unit of time (or ever)? Please stop using bogus comparisons and highly contrived tests. They do nothing to help your argument. The goal of this example was to show that in a

<    1   2   3   4   >