Summary: | dev-java/fop-0.93 has package.use.masked doc on amd64 due to out of memory error | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | menschmeier <steffen.scheuring> |
Component: | [OLD] Java | Assignee: | Java team <java> |
Status: | RESOLVED OBSOLETE | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | nfortino |
Priority: | High | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | AMD64 | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Bug Depends on: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 187600 |
Description
menschmeier
2007-05-08 06:54:17 UTC
How much memory do you have? physical: 2 GB free RAM: about 1 GB SWAP: 3 GB 3Gb Swap !!! dam thats a lot. Just in process of hunting down optimal amount of to pass to thru -Xmx currently looks like 256 is good. Ok. so here is the sad sad story. fop's javadocs will not build on amd64. I tried cranking Xmx over 1g still with no luck and using ecj-3.2. Currently I have package.use.mask'd the doc use flag for >=fop-0.93. so sorry no javadocs will be available. I quick look on the web page did not show them to be downloadable separately. As it looks like we will have to use upstream produced javadocs for amd64. the ebuild is now depending on eclipse-ecj-3.2 and has ANT_OPTS="-Xmx256M" set. I have just committed, so this fix should hit the rsync mirrors in a couple of hours. This bug will stay open until doc are available for amd64. (In reply to comment #4) > > fop's javadocs will not build on amd64. I tried cranking Xmx over 1g still > with no luck and using ecj-3.2. ecj does not have anything to do with javadocs. Could try how well gjdoc does. I just built this with the doc flag, and after addressing an unreasonable 2.3G of virtual memory to create the javadocs, it seemed to build just fine. I'm not sure if 2.3G is still considered a DOS on a 64-bit system, so the mask probably still makes some sense. Just built fop-0.95 with the doc useflag enabled on an amd64. Valgrind segfaults, so the numbers below are taken from top. Virtal size < 1.1GB Residual size < 270MB Seems like the mask could be removed and this bug be closed. Package has undergone an update. Consider using fop-2.0. |