When compiling from source, I never know which configure flags to use to optimize the compilation for my environment. Assume the following hardware/OS:
Single Core, 2 GHz Intel
512MB Ram
Debian 4
I usually just go with
./configure --prefix=/usr/local
Should I be doing anything else?
I always use Debian packages. Compiling from sources can break your development environment during libraries conflicts and such problems are hard to detect.
You might want to check those few options out, which may be required by a Ruby On Rails environment, in which case they should be compiled. Just make sure the directory corresponds to your current settings.
--with-openssl-dir=/usr --with-readline-dir=/usr --with-zlib-dir=/usr
I recommend mixing in a few packages from Debian Unstable feeds. They tend to be pretty stable, despite the name. They're also very up to date.
Related
I have a project with about 1000 sources files.
Make takes about 5 seconds to check whether the project is up to date.
Is there any solution to improve this check? (Is C-Make more suitable for this kind of project?)
CMake uses Make, so using CMake probably won't help.
One thing you can try is find out whether disk I/O is the bottleneck. That seems likely if rerunning your make command is a lot faster than the initial run. To be sure, put the files on a memory-mapped filesystem (on Linux, I use /dev/shm; on Windows, I use ImDisk).
You may also need to check whether your rules can be optimized. GNU Make doesn't have any profiling built in to help you with that.
There is a version of GNU make called remake that includes a profiler.
I am working on CentOS 6 machines, which has very old GCC/GlibC version. I want to build the whole glibc, binutils, gcc toolchain with latest or at least very recent versions in order to use c++11 support in latest gcc, and ld.gold in recent binutils, and possibly improvements in recent glibc.
I want to put the whole toolchain in some separate directory, and not to influence any existing system files. I also want to build gcc with --sys-root so that when using the gcc, I don't need to specify -I/some/directory/include and -L/some/directory/lib or whatever other parameters. Also the generated executable will automatically use the new ld-linux-xxxxx program loader which will automatically find the new libc.so.
Anyone knows if there exists some tutorial on this task?
The compiler is very dependent on glibc, altough you manage to build the compiler either in a chrooted system or equivalent, you will need to build also all libraries needed with the program you will build with this new compiler.
The best you can do is use a fresh new system (vm or whatever) or upgrade your existing one
You can download the latest toolchain from Openembedded or Yocto.
And here you don't have to do any package installation to your current system.
Just download the toolchain, source the environment and thats it you are ready to check the c++11 support.
The location to download the toolchain:
http://downloads.yoctoproject.org/releases/yocto/yocto-1.7/toolchain/ (Just select the architecture either 32bit or 64 bit based on your machine support)
If you need the latest toolchain, you'd better migrate to Fedora.
If you can't/won't, the best bet is to get the pieces as source RPMs for CentOS and Fedora, unpack them and fix up the CentOS by pilfering the sources and patches from Fedora, take care it doesn't overrule the system packages, correct versions and fix to install elsewhere (don't mess up your system too much! /usr/local comes to mind). The pieces are at least binutils, gcc.
I do not knwo Why you need this ? If this is needed that to compile for another computer, I would suggest using a virtual machine running the same OS as target. much more easier !!
I love coding in Haskell, but often am on a computer where I cannot install software, and which has some restrictions about what you can run. I would like to write Haskell code and test it while on this computer. Does anyone know of version of Haskell, interpreted or compiled, written in Java, JavaScript, Ruby, Python, or another interpreted language available in the default install on a Mac? A standalone version of Haskell which can be installed at the user level works too, but compiling Haskell myself is not an option.
The GHC binary distributions (the ones that come as tarballs, not installers) all can be installed locally trivially easily.
./configure --prefix=$HOME/ghc
make install
Then update your path to include $HOME/ghc/bin
If you want cabal, get the tarball from hackage, then untar it and run bootstrap.sh.
GHC works really well as a local install. In fact, I never use it as a system install.
I do this on my workstation, too, so that the distribution I'm on (Debian in my case) doesn't suddenly start upgrading stuff without me noticing in a simple apt-get upgrade.
This solution installs a full ghc and haskell-platform as well as ~/.cabal prefix.
First of all, I have a ~/local directory that I use in order to put custom-compiled programs in my home directory. I usually dislike the sudo make install step, because I'm giving some random Makefile root access to my system, and that makes me feel queasy.
Then I download the ghc binary distribution from the ghc site. NOTE that I linked you to 7.4.2. I hear there's some segfault bug on Mac OS X, but I'm not aware of the details. You should check that out or get the newer ghc instead, but be aware that there are many packages on hackage that are not yet fixed to work with 7.6. Also, ignore that "STOP!" warning, you're the 1% who actually want a non-distrib GHC binary.
You can just cd into the ghc directory, then do ./configure --prefix=$HOME/local/haskell or so, followed by make install (no compiling necessary, it's just going to install, not compile.)
At this point, you should add ~/local/haskell/bin to your path. Here's the code that I put in my ~/.zshrc, which will add all ~/local/*/bin directories to your path.
You can then get the Haskell Platform, and do the same ./configure --prefix=$HOME/local/haskell && make && make install dance. This step will need compilation. It means that you will need some header libraries installed. I find the random openGL headers that are necessary particularly annoying.
You can also of course skip haskell-platform, and just download cabal-install directly, then install what you need. You should in any case not forget to add ~/.cabal/bin to your $PATH!
Do a cabal update and you should be good to go.
NOTE: there's one important part that the binary distribution of GHC needs, which can sometimes be a pita on old Linux systems: libgmp. It's linked dynamically against it, and if you get some errors about the shared libgmp not being found on OS X, too, you can… well, ask that question in a comment, and I shall explain how to get there. Basically, you'll have to compile libgmp + deps yourself.
But I don't think that should be a problem on OS X. It's just been a problem on a couple old debian boxes I've tried this on.
For single files, you can use codepad.
I know we can always use eselect to change the compiler version. My question is that possible to bind different version to different users. For example, I would like root to use stable version for sure. and meanwhile, I would like my normal user to use some edge-cutting version.
I expect some clean solution instead of switch manually by using eselect
Thanks
I really hope you're not using eselect for this. eselect-compiler was killed off years ago because it was experimental and had many problems. gcc-config is what you should be using. Unfortunately it doesn't have per-user support like we have for Java. You can always call the specific version explicitly (e.g. gcc-4.6.2 instead of just gcc). If you're building software with autotools then you can do it with...
CC=gcc-4.6.2 ./configure
make
You can use gcc-config to print the environment variables necessary to use a specific GCC version. For example, to use gcc-7.2.0 for the remainder of your shell session:
eval "$(gcc-config --print-environ x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-7.2.0)"
What are the things I need in my install and uninstall targets in a Makefile for an OCaml library in order to make it play nicely with the rest of the installation, work seamlessly with ocamlfind and so on? Basically to be a "good citizen". I am not interested in GODI at the present time. Thanks!
META files for ocamlfind are easy to write (basically, look for a META in another ocaml project you know¹, copy it and make the corresponding changes), and they will give you ocamlfind integration, with in particular easy support for post-build installation and desinstallation (using ocamlfind install and ocamlfind remove). You should begin with that.
¹: for example I take inspiration from batteries's META.
The building part of the Makefile is more tricky, their are numerous solutions (OCamlMakefile, OMake, ocamlbuild, plain Makefile, etc.) with varying strenghts and weaknesses. If you project is simple enough I would recommend ocamlbuild that takes care of a lot of the dependency tracking by itself.
You may also use Oasis, which is a relatively new tools that builds on ocamlbuild and ocamlfind and seeks to provide a unified configuration file for pre-build configuration and various building and deployment (of your program, your software libraries if any, accompanying data or documentation...). It's not yet a mature project (and its little brother Oasis-DB isn't released yet), but I encourage you to give it a try if you have time. It's a bit more complex than META, as it does more in the end, so building the META first is still a good step.
Finally, you said you weren't interested in Godi (Godi is a very good system, and in some cases (eg. BSD etc.) it's a premium choice to have a good OCaml installation), but in case you may still be interested in Godiva, a tool to help the building of GODI packages. I have never used it myself, though.
I don't use makefiles but ocamlbuild and a shell script to install the software I distribute. Debian people did packages for my software with these scripts without problems. So you may want to check them out since they correspond to some of their requirements (e.g. separate targets for byte and native code).
You may also want to have a look
to their packaging policy, though I don't know if this document is still up to date.
Don't forget to add a META file for ocamlfind. And you may also want to include an _oasis file for the upcoming oasis-db project (not yet done in the software I distribute).