gmane.linux.lfs.general

Re: Experiment: using -O3 in the toolchain

Andrew Elian — 2012-05-24T23:27:07

<snip>

I remember using optimizations to get just a bit more out of what I had
at the time.  CFLAGS="-O3 -mcpu=pentium -march=pentium"  on 100MHz of
non-mmx performance!  Quick - where's my lilo boot floppy ...  It sure
did take a while to compile, especially KDE.  That took my machine a few
days to do.  The end result was pretty wonderful though.

Old habits die hard, so I continue to use optimizations as much as
possible.  I found it does add to the time compiling, however, I'd be
hard pressed to say that it speeds up how fast the binaries run.
It just might be it doesn't make any difference.
Of course, I am using somewhat more mordern system nowadays.

ae

Experiment: using -O3 in the toolchain

Ken Moffat — 2012-05-24T02:34:21

 Last month, I was querying the use of -O3 in glibc with x86_64 on
lfs-dev : turned out my problems on that one machine are down to
buying cheap consumer-grade hardware (it works, mostly) :)  But I
then got to thinking about using -O3 for the rest of the toolchain.
I've now completed test builds (CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS = -O2 everywhere,
and with -O3 in chapter 5 pass 2 and chapter 6 binutils, gmp, mpc,
mpfr,gcc).  Note that some packages, particularly in BLFS, ignore
CFLAGS.  The toolchain testsuite results are no different (same
failures in gcc, and with static libs which I do not install).

 This is x86_64 on an i3 (hyperthreaded dual processor, the kernel
thinks it is 4 processors) with 4GB of RAM.  I built these in
directories because they aren't intended to be used, and I didn't
build the kernel (that would be another 4 or 5 minutes!).

 Apart from that, I built everything that is currently part of my
normal desktop, and using -j3 for builds (but not installs!) except
where that gives problems.  I try to reserve some cpu so that cron
jobs, particularly backups, can run, or  so that I can browse or
listen to music if I wish to, in both cases without impacting the
build time or my listening/browsing experience.

 It's nice to now have hardware that is capable of building with -O3
on current gcc (my previous single processor machines were too slow
and too lacking in RAM), but I don't think I'll bother again.

 I used my standard scripts, so timing for each package is from
configure to the end of the install, to the nearest second.  The
times for the total build were 6 hours and 6 hours 3 minutes with
the -O3 toolchain.  The -O3 build used slightly more disk space in
/usr/bin and /usr/lib, but the difference was minimal.

 Obviously, building the toolchain with -O3 took a bit longer (20
seconds in LFS chapter 5, a bit over 3 minutes 12 sec in chapter
6), but then I saw *minor* gains in many BLFS packages, at least
until I got to QT (1294 seconds in my configuration, instead of 1256
using -O2).  I also lost half a minute in building the gnome packages
I use, but the gnome script takes about 90 minutes, mostly in webkit
with -j1, so the differences are immaterial and lost in the noise.

 If I was to do it again, I wouldn't be suprised to see a bigger
variation from doing identical builds - this isn't a hard realtime
OS.

 So, I wondered how using -O3 in the toolchain would affect the
build, and now I know.  Back when I first arrived here,
optimisations were in vogue among some people to speed up our
compiles.  I think I can happily avoid investigating optimisations
again. :)

ĸen

console graphics libraries (was Re: libre kernel)

LM — 2012-05-22T11:37:31

I've had mixed luck with svgalib.  It worked fine on an old Sony
laptop, but my main desktop with ATI All-In-Wonder (PCI-Express) card
just can't seem to work with it.  I tried several settings changes
with svgalib and just couldn't find a way to use it on that system.  I
have been looking into using directfb with various libraries in order
to get progarms to work outside of X.  That solution works for my
desktop, but unfortunately, probably won't work for the laptop which
has an older video card (neomagic).  SDL works with directfb.
WxWidgets is working on a directfb port.  I also found an older
version of fltk that's meant to be used with directfb.  Pdcurses also
works with SDL and directfb, although ncurses works fine directly in
console mode.  Keep thinking that with the right libraries one could
make a pretty nice distribution that doesn't need to use X, but could
still be used for basic desktop functionality like word processing,
audio and basic graphics and video editing/viewing.  If anyone runs
across other GUI libraries that work fine in console mode or outside
of X, would be very interested in hearing about them.

Sincerely,
Laura
http://www.distasis.com/cpp

Re: libre kernel

Serge Hooge — 2012-05-22T09:33:07

The FSF's main goal is universal software freedom, so, surely, that
includes firmware too. I highly recommend reading or viewing Richard
Stallman's essays/lectures or paying a visit to the Education portal on
gnu.org if you want to learn more.

There's a /very/ WIP, but promising free BIOS, called coreboot
(http://www.coreboot.org/Welcome_to_coreboot), which is quite good,
but at this moment supports only a small number of motherboards (230). 
It is on GNU's high priority projects list at the moment.

Re: libre kernel

2012-05-22T01:28:42

 I downloaded deblob-2.6.34 and  deblob-check from GNU and tried them on 
a new partion with a fresh back-up os, a freshly unpacked kernel and the 
script hung with  an error about gawk. I went to sleep  with it running
and woke up with it running. Top showed gawk still using 97% of the
processor. Lucky thing my fan was working well.
 My verion of gawk is probably too old and I might even RTFM or read the
README. I'm sure to try again because I have plenty of disk space and 
time; It's money that is short supply. But I'll warn you I'll probably 
never give up the freedom that LFS gives one to go back to a dist-
ribution. Like Andrew I want my system too work well, and if I have too
use non-free software to achieve that , I will.
 I was looking at the code for svgalib, a program I love because I can
play quake on the console and watch movies with mplayer without  
Xorg plus it pretty easy to learn and to write console graphics.
This is the contents of the file LICENSE:

This package is copyrighted by the people who wrote it.
You may do with it whatever you want.

 You seem to be quite knowledable about the Gnu os. What is Gnu's
or the FSF's position on the bios and bios flashes ? Certainly that
is firmware. If I hadn't flashed the bios on this machine I would have a 
320 gig paperweight. I respect your dedication to free software and 
appreciate the tips about alternate sources for drivers,but if I run a 
console only system and use the vesa framebuffer my system use no blobs.

 ### Mike Hollis ###

Re: libre kernel

Serge Hooge — 2012-05-19T09:34:56

Yes, the proprietary NVidia drivers can handle much more than free
alternatives, but nouveau can launch things like Nexuiz easily
nowadays. nv is outdated, but is usable for
basic 2D video.

Re: libre kernel

Mike Hollis — 2012-05-19T08:32:14

 snip 
 unsnip

 My card is a GeForce2 MX200 . My newest computer was was zapped by
lightning last summer and In the process of trying  to salvage my files
I made a mistake and deleted about 150 gig of data that I had saved for
years including my LFS and BLFS sources. Right now I only have dial-up
and the lfs-sources off the live cd running on an old Toshiba server , 
but it's better than nothing. I won't be doing much major downloading
and os building due to the limited bandwith till I can afford newer
hardware and broadband again. 
 I don't remember the version of Xorg I was using before disaster struck 
but the Nvidia proprietary driver was superior to anything else I tried.
The nv driver from Xorg wouldn't run the GLX programs properly.
 However, thanks for the suggestions and input. I went back to to the 
Gnu website and perused the jokes section; some really funny stuff 
there.
 
### Mike Hollis ###
  

didn't work as well as the p

Re: libre kernel

Serge Hooge — 2012-05-19T05:49:20

Which graphics card do you have? NVidia cards have nouveau (or nv),
which is good enough today to handle heavy 3D. ATI and Intel both have
libre drivers, AFAIK.

http://www.h-node.org holds a hardware database which holds a list of
hardware pieces fully and freely supported, and many are not at all
old. 

Again, it's entirely possible to build a completely free machine (up to
the level of BIOS) and have a good performance. So not really. Blobs
can be avoided and it's mostly a matter of your understanding and
devotion to free software.

Re: libre kernel

Andrew Benton — 2012-05-18T22:16:53

On Fri, 18 May 2012 16:59:09 +0100
Mike Hollis <holliskm< at >gmail.com> wrote:


I've never tried but I'm certain I couldn't use my current graphics
card without binary blob firmware. I do prefer to buy hardware that
doesn't need firmware but usually you don't know what it needs until
you unbox it and plug it in and see what lspci says about it. I'm
pretty sure I could put together a computer that would run without any
binary blobs but I'm also reasonably sure it would consist of really
old parts that I probably wouldn't be using otherwise :/
So it's a compromise. It's good to have principles and free (as in
open) software is a good thing but it's also nice to have a computer
that performs well.

Andy

test

Mike Hollis — 2012-05-18T21:24:04

Moderator: 
 Please excuse the test message. I was receiving other messages but not 
my own I think due to to an error in my Muttrc file and also testing a
procmail recipe for mailing list deliveries.

 Thanks,

#### MIke Hollis ####

Re: libre kernel

Mike Hollis — 2012-05-18T20:00:54

 
 Thanks for the reply; I may look into it when I compile the kernel 
 again but it would be pointless unless I ditch the Nvidia proprietary
 driver which already taints my kernel. Right now with the state of
 my hardware and software,(old and dated) I probably wouldn't miss it
 as I use text mode browsers most of the time and my machine is too
 slow for gaming.
  The contributions of FSF and GNU to the advancement of "alternative"
 software and os's can't be overstated. Indeed I was exposed to gnu 
 software many years before I heard the term Linux. I had a friend who
 had an XT ( I had a tandy with 64k) and lots of games on floppy and 
 first met gnuchess and the README told the story of Stallman and the 
 recalcitrant (printer ?) and thought it was pretty cool.
  On the other hand without the Linux kernel and the early distributions 
 I might be still sitting around waiting for the blue screen of death . 
  One thought on the issue of "freedom"; As primarily an end user , which 
 I think places me in a majority, my major concern about software and  
 hardware is how well it works for me and I think we should be able to
 make these choices without feeling like a pariah or an outcast.
 Thanks again,
 
 
 #### Mike Hollis ####

Re: libre kernel

Serge Hooge — 2012-05-18T16:45:35

The blobs are mostly drivers for a few specifically freedom-denying
pieces of hardware, unless you need those, then no. I'm using a libre
kernel on my primary machine (which runs Parabola) and a few of my
other machines and I don't have much trouble.

libre kernel

Mike Hollis — 2012-05-18T15:51:39

 I just subcribed to this list and as yet have recieved no mailings to 
reply to, but this is relevent to the earlier posts about the gnu 
gnu-linux discussion. As the one poster said this will probably never
be resolved and I don't wish to open that can of worms.
 The discussion did get me curious and I checked the gnu web page as I
hadn't looked at it in some time and it pretty surprising to look at the
listed "free distributions". None of what I considered to be the major
players in early linux development were listed for various reasons. They
also offered scripts to remove the "blobs" from the vanilla linux 
kernel.
 I took a quick look at one of the "de-blob" scripts and was surprised 
at how extensive it was. My question is to anyone that has experience or
expertise in this area: Would these kernels lose considerable 
functionality compared to a regular kernel ?


Thanks,


#### Mike Hollis ####

Why not GNU/Linux From Scratch

LM — 2012-05-09T11:00:34

Just my two cents, but what happens when you use utilities from the
BSD toolchain on your system as well (like libarchive).  Does it
become GNU/BSD/Linux From Scratch?  What if you have pieces with other
licensing arrangements (zlib, etc.) or you're using llvm or some other
compiler in place of GNU gcc?  Do you change the name again?  Linux
from Scratch is a pretty well-known name and it pretty much sums up
what it is, a way to build Linux from Scratch.

Re: Why not GNU/Linux From Scratch

David Shaw — 2012-05-08T11:29:03


This is an argument that I'm starting to get a little tired of hearing, 
partly because it is so utterly pointless and partly because it will, 
unfortunately, *never* be resolved.

While it is true that what is known as Linux is actually the Linux 
kernel plus the GNU toolset, the GNU toolset is not exclusive to Linux 
and can be used in a large variety of operating systems - including Windows.

Therefore, to my mind, at least, calling it GNU/Linux is not only 
cumbersome but innaccurate.  What makes Linux distinctively Linux and 
not Windows or MacOS or Solaris or BSD or ReactOS or... well, you get 
the idea, is its kernel, not all the extra bits that are bolted on to it 
to make it into a complete OS.

However, having said that, Linux is all about choice and if other people 
choose to call it GNU/Linux, that's fine by me - provided that they, in 
turn, respect *my* choice not to.

David Shaw

Re: Why not GNU/Linux From Scratch

asgromo — 2012-05-08T10:12:33


Rose by any other name...

Why not GNU/Linux From Scratch

Armin K. — 2012-05-08T10:10:32

Today I got an interesting question on LFS IRC:

<stallman mode="on">
Why LFS is called LFS and not GLFS (GNU/Linux From Scratch)
</stallman>

What do you think?

ncurses versus pdcurses

LM — 2012-05-07T11:19:57

Was just wondering if anyone could think of any pros or cons to using
pdcurses in place of ncurses for certain curses based applications.  You
can build pdcurses to work with X11 and run the applications directly
within X or you can build it using SDL which can add framebuffer support
with directfb.  Most of the applications I'm looking at that use curses are
cross-platform applications, so they're designed to work with either
library.  Would be interested in hearing opinions.  Thanks.

Re: Ghost in the machine ? : .la file(s) getting emptied

Ken Moffat — 2012-05-04T15:19:54

 The scripting error, or a bad sed during a build of something
unrelated (possibly, kbd-1.15.3 during testing), seem most likely.
But it's a weird day -

 I'm trying to upgrade to gimp-2.8.0 on my 7.1 system where the
toolkit packages are a bit old.  It told me I needed gtk+-2.24.10.
I _tested_ that would build without updating anything else - fine -
so tried it for real and got a compile error in gtkiconview.c,
GClassFinalizeFunc undeclared.  Might be a race with make -j3 (I
managed to install it at the second attempt), but if so it's a very
strange result, and I've previously built it with make -j{3,4} on at
least three occasions.

 Oh, and now I need the newer gdk-pixbuf too.  Time to look at the
configure script to see what else is too old.   Feels like I must
have accidentally upset Her Noodliness :-(

ĸen

Re: Ghost in the machine ? : .la file(s) getting emptied

Andrew Benton — 2012-05-04T14:14:17

On Fri, 04 May 2012 13:30:34 +0100
Ken Moffat <zarniwhoop< at >ntlworld.com> wrote:


No, sorry. Could it be a hardware problem/bad disk sector? Have you run
fsck? The other possibility is some sort of scripting error/bad sed but
that's just speculation.

Andy

Ghost in the machine ? : .la file(s) getting emptied

Ken Moffat — 2012-05-04T12:30:26

 I'm just trying to upgrade a package on my LFS-7.1 system, and a
compile failed because /usr/lib64/libstdc++.la was not a valid
libtool archive.  Too right - it was empty!  Looking at ls -l it was
updated on 30th April (original install was on 8th April).

 Fortunately, my oldest backup was before that and I was able to
restore it.  But I'm sure I've seen something similar, perhaps even
the same file, in the past few months (not necessarily on this
particular system).  Looking at other updates, nothing (apart from
kernel upgrades) since 28th April until today.

 Anyone seen anything like this ?

ĸen