From owner-freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org Thu Mar 30 17:06:49 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-toolchain@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54192D26F6C; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 17:06:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:6074::16:84]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "freefall.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3167C1D6; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 17:06:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org) Received: by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033) id 755D742BA; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 17:06:48 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 17:06:48 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev To: Dimitry Andric Cc: Mark Millard , Johannes M Dieterich , Matthew Rezny , FreeBSD Current , FreeBSD Toolchain , FreeBSD Ports , FreeBSD PowerPC ML Subject: Re: FYI: what it takes for RAM+swap to build devel/llvm40 with 4 processors or cores and WITH__DEBUG= (powerpc64 example) Message-ID: <20170330170648.GA38004@FreeBSD.org> References: <3EDEF0B7-59C5-4648-9737-6682E18645BC@dsl-only.net> <39C60316-F905-490D-B0AB-BC24D7F351A2@dsl-only.net> <7F94CE59-D2CC-4D6F-B1CD-FF3D1F8EDCE7@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7F94CE59-D2CC-4D6F-B1CD-FF3D1F8EDCE7@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04) X-BeenThere: freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Maintenance of FreeBSD's integrated toolchain List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 17:06:49 -0000 On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:41:40AM +0200, Dimitry Andric wrote: > On 26 Mar 2017, at 23:36, Mark Millard wrote: > > ... > > Also interesting was: > > > > Installed packages to be REMOVED: > > llvm40-4.0.0.r4 > > > > Number of packages to be removed: 1 > > > > The operation will free 49 GiB. > > Yes, this is big. But there is no real need to build the llvm ports > with debug information, unless you want to hack on llvm itself. Cc'ing jmd@ and rezny@. I've been watching increasing size of our LLVM packages with increasing worry. This is from my tinderbox cache: $ % env LANG=C ls -lh llvm3* -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 17M Jan 29 2016 llvm35-3.5.2_1.txz -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 18M Mar 7 2016 llvm36-3.6.2_2.txz -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 27M Feb 28 01:05 llvm37-3.7.1_4.txz -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 207M Jan 19 18:20 llvm38-3.8.1_5.txz -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 244M Mar 23 16:42 llvm39-3.9.1_2.txz Dimitry, do you know what had causes such a huge bump in 37 -> 38? They take lots of time to build and package. And given that llvm is indirect dependency of any X11-related port, it pessimises their build times as well (devel/libclc now requires devel/llvm40 after r437268). With 49 GiB llvm40, I guess I won't be able to build-test post as my hardware would just not be capable enough. ./danfe