Pale Moon forum

Discussion forum for the Pale Moon web browser
https://forum.palemoon.org/

Repositories for supported Debian, Raspbian, and Ubuntu releases

https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=11466

Page 22 of 45

Re: Ubuntu 16.04, 16.10, 17.04, 18.04 Debian 8, 9 Pale Moon repositories

Posted: 2020-05-08, 12:25
by moonbat
Pentium4User wrote: ↑
2020-05-08, 09:45
 These are often still used and can't be easily replaced due to missing money.
How expensive is a fifth hand 64bit computer these days? Even something a decade old is better than this antiquated early 2000s stuff.

Re: Ubuntu 16.04, 16.10, 17.04, 18.04 Debian 8, 9 Pale Moon repositories

Posted: 2020-05-08, 12:40
by Moonchild
It really won't cost you more than $50 to get something usable, maybe even half-decent.

Re: Ubuntu 16.04, 16.10, 17.04, 18.04 Debian 8, 9 Pale Moon repositories

Posted: 2020-05-08, 18:00
by stevenpusser
Working on 28.9.3 now. <crosses fingers>

32 bit also is relevant for current ARM builds, such as for the Pi, which I'm now doing in the repo, so it's not that simple. $50 is also quite a bit of cash in many poorer countries where many people may rely on older computers, so I try to provide 32-bit packages if it doesn't take heroic efforts to do so.

Re: Ubuntu 16.04, 16.10, 17.04, 18.04 Debian 8, 9 Pale Moon repositories

Posted: 2020-05-08, 18:06
by New Tobin Paradigm
Aren't all Pis 64bit now?

Re: Ubuntu 16.04, 16.10, 17.04, 18.04 Debian 8, 9 Pale Moon repositories

Posted: 2020-05-08, 18:29
by stevenpusser
Maybe the Pi 4...but Raspian is still 32-bit.

Re: Ubuntu 16.04, 16.10, 17.04, 18.04 Debian 8, 9 Pale Moon repositories

Posted: 2020-05-08, 20:45
by Moonchild
Also keep in mind that our support for ARM-64 is worse than ARM-32 when it comes to JavaScript JITing. We have no IonMonkey support for ARM-64, for example.

Re: Ubuntu 16.04, 16.10, 17.04, 18.04 Debian 8, 9 Pale Moon repositories

Posted: 2020-05-09, 03:43
by stevenpusser
With today's builds for MX Linux on my laptop, I was able to streamline the linker flags a little:

Code: Select all

ac_add_options --enable-optimize="-O2 -w -Wl,--no-keep-memory,--reduce-memory-overhead"
so I'll add those to the OBS builds with the next version

Re: Ubuntu 16.04, 16.10, 17.04, 18.04 Debian 8, 9 Pale Moon repositories

Posted: 2020-05-09, 06:10
by New Tobin Paradigm
I'll make a note about that in the linux build instructions on the developer site sooner or later.

Re: Ubuntu 16.04, 16.10, 17.04, 18.04 Debian 8, 9 Pale Moon repositories

Posted: 2020-06-07, 03:03
by stevenpusser
28.10.0 in now in the repo for 32 and 64-bit Intel/AMD and ARM64 architectures.

All 32-bit ARM (armhf) builds are now failing with this error, though:

Code: Select all

[10553s] In file included from /usr/src/packages/BUILD/platform/js/src/gc/StoreBuffer.h:17,
[10553s]                  from /usr/src/packages/BUILD/platform/js/src/gc/Barrier.h:13,
[10553s]                  from /usr/src/packages/BUILD/platform/js/src/jsatom.h:14,
[10553s]                  from /usr/src/packages/BUILD/platform/js/src/vm/Xdr.h:13,
[10553s]                  from /usr/src/packages/BUILD/platform/js/src/vm/Xdr.cpp:7,
[10553s]                  from /usr/src/packages/BUILD/obj-armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf/js/src/Unified_cpp_js_src36.cpp:2:
[10553s] /usr/src/packages/BUILD/platform/js/src/ds/LifoAlloc.h: In instantiation of 'T* js::LifoAllocPolicy<fb>::maybe_pod_calloc(size_t) [with T = js::detail::HashTableEntry<js::HashMapEntry<js::wasm::AstSig*, unsigned int> >; js::Fallibility fb = js::Fallible; size_t = unsigned int]':
[10553s] /usr/src/packages/BUILD/obj-armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf/dist/include/js/HashTable.h:1249:63:   required from 'static js::detail::HashTable<T, HashPolicy, AllocPolicy>::Entry* js::detail::HashTable<T, HashPolicy, AllocPolicy>::createTable(AllocPolicy&, uint32_t, js::detail::HashTable<T, HashPolicy, AllocPolicy>::FailureBehavior) [with T = js::HashMapEntry<js::wasm::AstSig*, unsigned int>; HashPolicy = js::HashMap<js::wasm::AstSig*, unsigned int, js::wasm::AstSig, js::LifoAllocPolicy<js::Fallible> >::MapHashPolicy; AllocPolicy = js::LifoAllocPolicy<js::Fallible>; js::detail::HashTable<T, HashPolicy, AllocPolicy>::Entry = js::detail::HashTableEntry<js::HashMapEntry<js::wasm::AstSig*, unsigned int> >; uint32_t = unsigned int]'
[10553s] /usr/src/packages/BUILD/obj-armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf/dist/include/js/HashTable.h:1317:28:   required from 'bool js::detail::HashTable<T, HashPolicy, AllocPolicy>::init(uint32_t) [with T = js::HashMapEntry<js::wasm::AstSig*, unsigned int>; HashPolicy = js::HashMap<js::wasm::AstSig*, unsigned int, js::wasm::AstSig, js::LifoAllocPolicy<js::Fallible> >::MapHashPolicy; AllocPolicy = js::LifoAllocPolicy<js::Fallible>; uint32_t = unsigned int]'
[10553s] /usr/src/packages/BUILD/obj-armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf/dist/include/js/HashTable.h:92:69:   required from 'bool js::HashMap<Key, Value, HashPolicy, AllocPolicy>::init(uint32_t) [with Key = js::wasm::AstSig*; Value = unsigned int; HashPolicy = js::wasm::AstSig; AllocPolicy = js::LifoAllocPolicy<js::Fallible>; uint32_t = unsigned int]'
[10553s] /usr/src/packages/BUILD/platform/js/src/wasm/WasmAST.h:802:29:   required from here
[10553s] /usr/src/packages/BUILD/platform/js/src/ds/LifoAlloc.h:616:15: warning: 'void* memset(void*, int, size_t)' clearing an object of type 'class js::detail::HashTableEntry<js::HashMapEntry<js::wasm::AstSig*, unsigned int> >' with no trivial copy-assignment [-Wclass-memaccess]
[10553s]   616 |         memset(p, 0, numElems * sizeof(T));
[10553s]       |         ~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[10553s] In file included from /usr/src/packages/BUILD/obj-armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf/dist/include/js/TracingAPI.h:12,
[10553s]                  from /usr/src/packages/BUILD/obj-armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf/dist/include/js/GCPolicyAPI.h:46,
[10553s]                  from /usr/src/packages/BUILD/obj-armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf/dist/include/js/RootingAPI.h:23,
[10553s]                  from /usr/src/packages/BUILD/obj-armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf/dist/include/js/CallArgs.h:73,
[10553s]                  from /usr/src/packages/BUILD/obj-armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf/dist/include/js/CallNonGenericMethod.h:12,
[10553s]                  from /usr/src/packages/BUILD/platform/js/src/NamespaceImports.h:15,
[10553s]                  from /usr/src/packages/BUILD/platform/js/src/gc/Barrier.h:10,
[10553s]                  from /usr/src/packages/BUILD/platform/js/src/jsatom.h:14,
[10553s]                  from /usr/src/packages/BUILD/platform/js/src/vm/Xdr.h:13,
[10553s]                  from /usr/src/packages/BUILD/platform/js/src/vm/Xdr.cpp:7,
[10553s]                  from /usr/src/packages/BUILD/obj-armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf/js/src/Unified_cpp_js_src36.cpp:2:
[10553s] /usr/src/packages/BUILD/obj-armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf/dist/include/js/HashTable.h:788:7: note: 'class js::detail::HashTableEntry<js::HashMapEntry<js::wasm::AstSig*, unsigned int> >' declared here
[10553s]   788 | class HashTableEntry
[10553s]       |       ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[10555s] make[6]: *** [/usr/src/packages/BUILD/platform/config/rules.mk:886: Unified_cpp_js_src36.o] Error 1

Re: Ubuntu 16.04, 16.10, 17.04, 18.04 Debian 8, 9 Pale Moon repositories

Posted: 2020-06-07, 12:46
by adesh
Off-topic:
You pasted good amount of log output but forgot to include the actual error message.

Re: Ubuntu 16.04, 16.10, 17.04, 18.04 Debian 8, 9 Pale Moon repositories

Posted: 2020-06-08, 03:44
by stevenpusser
Hmm--it's tough to pick out. Here's another of the failed arm builds, for Debian Buster: https://build.opensuse.org/public/build ... emoon/_log

Do you think it's this line, which appears several times in the parallel build?

Code: Select all

[13526s] /usr/src/packages/BUILD/platform/js/src/wasm/WasmBaselineCompile.cpp:3504:25: error: 'ins' was not declared in this scope

Re: Ubuntu 16.04, 16.10, 17.04, 18.04 Debian 8, 9 Pale Moon repositories

Posted: 2020-06-08, 09:55
by adesh
Issue got introduced with MIPS support.

Error is due to a typo in this commit:
https://github.com/MoonchildProductions ... b9adeR3394

Replace `IsUnaligned(ins->access())` with `IsUnaligned(access)` in the affected file and retry the build. It has to be fixed in the code though.

EDIT:
I've corrected the typo in my branch here: https://github.com/adeshkp/UXP/tree/fix-arm-build
Can you try the ARM build on this branch? Let us know if it succeeds so it can be merged into platform.

Re: Ubuntu 16.04, 16.10, 17.04, 18.04 Debian 8, 9 Pale Moon repositories

Posted: 2020-06-09, 04:42
by stevenpusser
I'll make a patch to change the code and see what happens in the OBS.

Re: Ubuntu 16.04, 16.10, 17.04, 18.04 Debian 8, 9 Pale Moon repositories

Posted: 2020-06-10, 02:57
by stevenpusser
That fixed it, so go ahead and push the patch.

https://build.opensuse.org/package/show ... r/palemoon

Re: Ubuntu 16.04, 16.10, 17.04, 18.04 Debian 8, 9 Pale Moon repositories

Posted: 2020-07-18, 03:49
by stevenpusser
28.11.0 is now in the repo, even for Debian Sid, which needed a workaround. Sorry for the delay.

Also removed repos for Ubuntu 18.10 and 19.04, since they aren't LTS. I can restore them if anyone's still using those releases for some reason. I left 19.10 since it's not that old.

Re: Ubuntu 16.04, 16.10, 17.04, 18.04 Debian 8, 9 Pale Moon repositories

Posted: 2020-07-18, 07:06
by Pentium4User
stevepusser wrote: ↑
2020-07-18, 03:49
 28.11.0 is now in the repo, even for Debian Sid, which needed a workaround. Sorry for the delay.

Also removed repos for Ubuntu 18.10 and 19.04, since they aren't LTS. I can restore them if anyone's still using those releases for some reason. I left 19.10 since it's not that old.
19.10 reached EOL yesterday, so you can remove that too.

Re: Ubuntu 16.04, 16.10, 17.04, 18.04 Debian 8, 9 Pale Moon repositories

Posted: 2020-07-18, 17:48
by stevenpusser
OK--if anyone is still using 19.10, hopefully this will encourage them to move on.

Re: Ubuntu 16.04, 16.10, 17.04, 18.04 Debian 8, 9 Pale Moon repositories

Posted: 2020-07-24, 03:46
by stevenpusser
Pushing a -2 update which hopefully will automatically detect a Sid build and only use one build thread there, with four otherwise. Added lsb-release to the build-depends for the detection in mozconfig:

Code: Select all

if test `lsb_release -sc` = "sid"; then
    mk_add_options MOZ_MAKE_FLAGS="-j1"
else
    mk_add_options MOZ_MAKE_FLAGS="-j4"
fi

Re: Ubuntu 16.04, 16.10, 17.04, 18.04 Debian 8, 9 Pale Moon repositories

Posted: 2020-07-24, 05:31
by Tharthan
Pentium4User wrote: ↑
2020-05-08, 09:45
 can't be easily replaced due to missing money.
Insufficient funds? Or did the money that they were going to use get lost in the couch cushions? ;)
moonbat wrote: ↑
2020-05-08, 12:25
 How expensive is a fifth hand 64bit computer these days? Even something a decade old is better than this antiquated early 2000s stuff.
I'll have you know that, aside from my Internet browsing, all of my serious work is done on an Apple Lisa. Works just fine for me.

Re: Ubuntu 16.04, 16.10, 17.04, 18.04 Debian 8, 9 Pale Moon repositories

Posted: 2020-08-06, 02:30
by stevenpusser
28.12.0 builds are finishing up in the repo for Debian 8 through testing, Raspian 9 and 10, and Ubuntu 16.04, 18.04, and 20.04.

After all the drama with Sid recently, now a new python2 version mismatch error is preventing the build from even starting--IDK if that's temporary, or due to a scheduled removal of python 2, which will make PM builds impossible for now anyway.
All times are UTC
Page 22 of 45

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited