| 1 |
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Michael Mol <mikemol@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 4:57 PM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> |
| 3 |
> wrote: |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>> On Wed, 12 Sep 2012 11:15:25 -0400 |
| 6 |
>> Michael Mol <mikemol@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Alan McKinnon |
| 9 |
>> > <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com>wrote: |
| 10 |
>> > |
| 11 |
>> > > On Wed, 12 Sep 2012 16:00:34 +0200 |
| 12 |
>> > > Alex Schuster <wonko@×××××××××.org> wrote: |
| 13 |
>> > > |
| 14 |
>> > > > Michael Mol writes: |
| 15 |
>> > > > |
| 16 |
>> > > > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Neil Bothwick |
| 17 |
>> > > > > <neil@××××××××××.uk <mailto:neil@××××××××××.uk>> wrote: |
| 18 |
>> > > > |
| 19 |
>> > > > > Instead we get, try USE="-*" :P |
| 20 |
>> > > > > |
| 21 |
>> > > > > "Try MAKEOPTS='-j1'" |
| 22 |
>> > > > |
| 23 |
>> > > > Which in fact often helps... especially for me, I am using |
| 24 |
>> > > > MAKEOPTS="-j --load=4", and I often experience build problems that |
| 25 |
>> > > > are not reproducible with a fixed number of jobs, regardless how |
| 26 |
>> > > > large. |
| 27 |
>> > > |
| 28 |
>> > > Yes indeed, and that one is good advice. |
| 29 |
>> > > |
| 30 |
>> > > Not every Makefile out there is safe for -j > 1, so running it as |
| 31 |
>> > > one job is valid debugging. It's the correct thing to do with weird |
| 32 |
>> > > build failures as it tests if a specific condition is true or not. |
| 33 |
>> > > |
| 34 |
>> > > |
| 35 |
>> > Yeah, except I've already gone that route, or otherwise ruled it out, |
| 36 |
>> > before I ask. That's why it's grating. (Even more grating when I have |
| 37 |
>> > to spend the time building a package again, just to convince someone |
| 38 |
>> > that, no, it's not MAKEOPTS that's the problem.) |
| 39 |
>> > |
| 40 |
>> > It's like "Have you tried turning it off and back on again". |
| 41 |
>> |
| 42 |
>> I learned that one the hard way :-) |
| 43 |
>> |
| 44 |
>> Now when I submit support posts, I try emulate what bgo asks: |
| 45 |
>> |
| 46 |
>> 1. nature of problem |
| 47 |
>> 2. what have I tried already |
| 48 |
>> 3. steps to reproduce |
| 49 |
>> 4. result gotten |
| 50 |
>> 5. expected result |
| 51 |
>> 6. relevant config files and settings |
| 52 |
>> |
| 53 |
>> Tends to weed out a lot of the silly auto-bot style answers |
| 54 |
>> |
| 55 |
> |
| 56 |
> I'm going through one on launchpad right now where I indicated that I |
| 57 |
> couldn't get beeps out of xterm, but I could get sound from sound-emitting |
| 58 |
> websites. (Trying to get x11 bell to function via PulseAudio via work |
| 59 |
> laptop) |
| 60 |
> |
| 61 |
> First response? "Needs information: Can you get sound from other sound |
| 62 |
> apps?" |
| 63 |
> |
| 64 |
> #pulseaudio simply ignored me. And googling turns up that Lennart hates the |
| 65 |
> X server as being a funnel for sound events. I was physically twitching by |
| 66 |
> the time I gave up... |
| 67 |
|
| 68 |
It is not a feature I use, but... I think you need the x11-bell module |
| 69 |
loaded in your PA config, and point it to a valid sound file |
| 70 |
containing your preferred beep noise. Maybe then also run "xset b on" |
| 71 |
in X... maybe some "xset b something" to set volume of the beep as |
| 72 |
well, and hope your desktop environment doesn't override your hard |
| 73 |
work with its own sound preferences. :) |
Archives