| 1 |
On Fri, Feb 05, 2021 at 04:42:26PM -0600, Matt Connell (Gmail) wrote |
| 2 |
> On Fri, 2021-02-05 at 13:24 -0500, Walter Dnes wrote: |
| 3 |
> > I'll have to take that back. It happened again, and I was not |
| 4 |
> > fiddling with pstop/pcont. The common element seems to be that I was |
| 5 |
> > compiling Pale Moon 29.0 each time it crashed. A machine with 8 gigs of |
| 6 |
> > ram, and 598 of 905 gigs free diskspace should not have resource issues. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> I contest this claim. 8GB is pretty scant for something as large and |
| 9 |
> complex as a modern browser. Have you built this before on the same |
| 10 |
> machine? |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
See http://www.palemoon.org/releasenotes.shtml My previous successful |
| 13 |
build was 28.17.0 which was released December 18th. Note: Chrome and |
| 14 |
Firefox seem to bump the major release number "just because". The Pale |
| 15 |
Moon devs use all 3 digits. E.g. an isolated bugfix has just been |
| 16 |
released as 29.0.1. When the major release number on Pale Moon is |
| 17 |
incremented, there are big changes "under the hood", so increased |
| 18 |
requirements are a possibility going from version 28.17 to 29.0. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
There's also ongoing work on "de-unifying the sources" |
| 21 |
https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=62&t=24296 The thread starts |
| 22 |
off with the question "Is it expected that Pale Moon compilation time |
| 23 |
has almost doubled after de-unifying the sources?". To which the head |
| 24 |
honcho replies... |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
> That was only de-unifying /dom -- more will follow. |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> And yes, if your aren't on a particularly powerful machine with |
| 29 |
> a fast drive, it can impact your compilation time significantly. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
I have a relatively new 16-gig machine (October) that I'll try it on. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
Walter Dnes <waltdnes@××××××××.org> |
| 35 |
I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications |
Archives