On Dienstag, 14. November 2017 17:08:18 CET Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Tuesday 2017-11-14 16:47, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> >On Nov 14 2017, Jan Engelhardt <jengelh(a)inai.de> wrote:
> >> I have a feeling though, that such won't be enough to get those
> >> unspeakably fat browsers to link - it may become necessary to use a
> >> 64-bit toolchain with -m32 to complete it, and then the baselibs
> >> mechanism to export the build results.>
> >Getting all build dependencies ready for -m32 would be a challenge,
> It could yes. The alternative would be to run a 32-bit userspace with a
> 64-bit linker program, requiring only a few -64bit baselibs.
> If we ever do x32, modifying mkbaselibs will be a necessity anyway.
> Might as well do it now :-)
For the time being, can we just package kernel-(l)pae as kernel-obs-build on
32 bit archs, i.e. i586/armv7l?
A PAE-enabled kernel has a slight overhead, but this is likely more than
compensated by hitting the guests swap later.
This does not change the 3GByte per process limit, which may cause failing
linker runs. Using a 64bit linker is much more effort, so I would vote for a
PAE kernel first and *if* we still see OOM errors, reconsider if we should go
the 64bit userspace route (i586 is quite dead, but armv7l may stay for a bit
CC'ed opensuse-kernel, as I already sent a patch addressing kernel-obs-build a
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner(a)opensuse.org