1 |
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 5:59 PM, Paul Hartman <paul.hartman+gentoo@×××××.com |
2 |
> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Michael Mol <mikemol@×××××.com> wrote: |
5 |
> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 4:57 PM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> |
6 |
> > wrote: |
7 |
> >> |
8 |
> >> On Wed, 12 Sep 2012 11:15:25 -0400 |
9 |
> >> Michael Mol <mikemol@×××××.com> wrote: |
10 |
> >> |
11 |
> >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Alan McKinnon |
12 |
> >> > <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com>wrote: |
13 |
> >> > |
14 |
> >> > > On Wed, 12 Sep 2012 16:00:34 +0200 |
15 |
> >> > > Alex Schuster <wonko@×××××××××.org> wrote: |
16 |
> >> > > |
17 |
> >> > > > Michael Mol writes: |
18 |
> >> > > > |
19 |
> >> > > > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Neil Bothwick |
20 |
> >> > > > > <neil@××××××××××.uk <mailto:neil@××××××××××.uk>> wrote: |
21 |
> >> > > > |
22 |
> >> > > > > Instead we get, try USE="-*" :P |
23 |
> >> > > > > |
24 |
> >> > > > > "Try MAKEOPTS='-j1'" |
25 |
> >> > > > |
26 |
> >> > > > Which in fact often helps... especially for me, I am using |
27 |
> >> > > > MAKEOPTS="-j --load=4", and I often experience build problems that |
28 |
> >> > > > are not reproducible with a fixed number of jobs, regardless how |
29 |
> >> > > > large. |
30 |
> >> > > |
31 |
> >> > > Yes indeed, and that one is good advice. |
32 |
> >> > > |
33 |
> >> > > Not every Makefile out there is safe for -j > 1, so running it as |
34 |
> >> > > one job is valid debugging. It's the correct thing to do with weird |
35 |
> >> > > build failures as it tests if a specific condition is true or not. |
36 |
> >> > > |
37 |
> >> > > |
38 |
> >> > Yeah, except I've already gone that route, or otherwise ruled it out, |
39 |
> >> > before I ask. That's why it's grating. (Even more grating when I have |
40 |
> >> > to spend the time building a package again, just to convince someone |
41 |
> >> > that, no, it's not MAKEOPTS that's the problem.) |
42 |
> >> > |
43 |
> >> > It's like "Have you tried turning it off and back on again". |
44 |
> >> |
45 |
> >> I learned that one the hard way :-) |
46 |
> >> |
47 |
> >> Now when I submit support posts, I try emulate what bgo asks: |
48 |
> >> |
49 |
> >> 1. nature of problem |
50 |
> >> 2. what have I tried already |
51 |
> >> 3. steps to reproduce |
52 |
> >> 4. result gotten |
53 |
> >> 5. expected result |
54 |
> >> 6. relevant config files and settings |
55 |
> >> |
56 |
> >> Tends to weed out a lot of the silly auto-bot style answers |
57 |
> >> |
58 |
> > |
59 |
> > I'm going through one on launchpad right now where I indicated that I |
60 |
> > couldn't get beeps out of xterm, but I could get sound from |
61 |
> sound-emitting |
62 |
> > websites. (Trying to get x11 bell to function via PulseAudio via work |
63 |
> > laptop) |
64 |
> > |
65 |
> > First response? "Needs information: Can you get sound from other sound |
66 |
> > apps?" |
67 |
> > |
68 |
> > #pulseaudio simply ignored me. And googling turns up that Lennart hates |
69 |
> the |
70 |
> > X server as being a funnel for sound events. I was physically twitching |
71 |
> by |
72 |
> > the time I gave up... |
73 |
> |
74 |
> It is not a feature I use, but... I think you need the x11-bell module |
75 |
> loaded in your PA config, and point it to a valid sound file |
76 |
> containing your preferred beep noise. Maybe then also run "xset b on" |
77 |
> in X... maybe some "xset b something" to set volume of the beep as |
78 |
> well, and hope your desktop environment doesn't override your hard |
79 |
> work with its own sound preferences. :) |
80 |
> |
81 |
|
82 |
xset is set properly, x11-bell module is loaded...but it's entirely unclear |
83 |
how to get it pointed at a valid sample file. Even PulseAudio's "Perfect |
84 |
Setup" page glosses over it. |
85 |
|
86 |
-- |
87 |
:wq |