Hi folks,
So for the last four days I've been trying to build this package. At first it was built without a chroot, but I eventually "learned the error of my ways", so to say, and tried to build it in a chroot, in a similar fashion to the method described on github. In both cases, with or without it being built in a chroot, I experienced the following.
The linkers, combined, kept using 24gb+ of ram (6-8gb each), on a pc which only has 12gbs of ram (just imagine the amount of swapping). I realize that I could've lowered the thread count (from 4 to 1) to solve this part of the problem, but I didn't think of it at the time. Anyways, the builds completed after ~4-4.5hrs, so this doesn't really matter.
So after ~4hrs of building it completed, but it was 33gb large (ouch), just a couple gigabytes too large to cram into my root partition. I tried repackaging it (makepkg -siRe --noprepare) with strip enabled, but it was taking 4+ hours just to strip, and I estimated that it would've taken another 16 hours to complete (based on the # of packages stripped, and the sized of their respective unstriped equivalents).
I later wiped either the chroot folder, or the src folder, depending on whether I was using a chroot or not. I then tried to build llvm-svn again (this time with strip enabled from the start), and... it's been stuck stripping for the last 6-8hrs (for the chrooted version, the non-chrooted version I canceled 4hrs into stripping)!
I do hope this is an unusual occurrence and that I just fucked up somewhere. 33gb of debug symbols strikes me as excessive. (I think it was mostly debug symbols because some of the stripped packages where in the hundred megabytes range, while their non-stripped counterparts were in the 5-10gb range.) And 8hrs of striping sounds excessive-er.
Has anyone experience anything similar? Do your builds, @kerberizer, normally take 8hrs+ to strip? Are non-stripped build usually in the tens of gigabytes range? Got any clues into how I could get it to work out or why this is happening?
Anyways, I've just installed llvm-svn and others from uni-plovdiv.net, I guess that's good enough for now, as I only need llvm-svn for mesa-git. But I was hoping that someone might have any advice relating to this, in case I stumble into a similar problem in the near or distant future.
Thanks, -- Hal Gentz
EDIT: rephrased a couple bits.
Pinned Comments
Lone_Wolf commented on 2021-08-16 11:26 (UTC)
When you have this package installed applications that are built against repo-llvm/clang WILL fail unless they are rebuild against this package.
This includes QTCreator, kdevelop , mesa, intel-compute-runtime, gnome-builder to name a few.
Lone_Wolf commented on 2020-08-22 12:18 (UTC) (edited on 2021-02-06 12:51 (UTC) by Lone_Wolf)
Archlinux currently has 3 llvm git implementations
This package
llvm-minimal-git
packages created & maintained by Lordheavy, an arch developer
Lone_Wolf commented on 2019-04-12 20:41 (UTC) (edited on 2019-12-16 22:45 (UTC) by Lone_Wolf)
I've looked good at clang-trunk , llvm-svn, repo llvm/clang packages and think this package is now on route to become a worthy successor to llvm-svn .
llvm-libs-git holds the runtime libraries.
llvm-git
The Package now uses a new environment variable to make ninja behave, NINJAFLAGS. If you want to use it adjust the snippet below to your desired values and add it to makepkg.conf.
Incase you are satisfied with ninja defaults you don't need to do anything.
The check() function fails rather often, but I do suggest to build with them. If build fails due to test failure you can add --nocheck to skip the tests.