From: <jr...@sf...> - 2008-07-15 21:02:26
|
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 13:16:42 -0700 pla...@li... wrote: > > On Jul 15, 2008, at 12:18 PM, Richard Vaughan wrote: > > > Folks, > > > > I just had a student build Player on an older machine. Older, but > > still handy - a dual proc 1.8GHz Mac Pro w/ 1.5GB RAM. To my great > > surprise, the python bits of the cmake config process took around 25 > > minutes. Has anyone else seen behaviour like this? (Python 2.5, Player > > SVN trunk.) > > Not me. Which part of the cmake process is specifically causing the > delay? > > brian. > The step following the message for finding PythonInterp takes around 5 minutes and the one after finding PythonLibs seems to take around 20. Each is accompanied by a pause with no output and no significant CPU usage or disk activity. Jeremy |
From: Jeremy A. <jr...@sf...> - 2008-07-16 17:24:17
|
I'm not too clear on how the CMake configuration process works, but two steps in the "===== Client Libraries =====" section are taking an incredibly long amount of time. As I said earlier, the two pauses follow the reports for finding PythonInterp and PythonLibs, so the activities that are being performed after locating the two must be the culprits. Has anyone else built on a PowerPC G5 running MacOS 10.5 or similar? Jeremy On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 08:15:53 0900 pla...@li... wrote: > So it's the finding Python stuff that takes the time, not the bits that > use Python? > > I've built Player 2.2 on my 1.2GHz laptop with no problems at all so I > doubt it's the computer speed. > > Geoff > > jr...@sf... wrote: > > On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 13:16:42 -0700 > > pla...@li... wrote: > >> On Jul 15, 2008, at 12:18 PM, Richard Vaughan wrote: > >> > >>> Folks, > >>> > >>> I just had a student build Player on an older machine. Older, but > >>> still handy - a dual proc 1.8GHz Mac Pro w/ 1.5GB RAM. To my great > >>> surprise, the python bits of the cmake config process took around 25 > >>> minutes. Has anyone else seen behaviour like this? (Python 2.5, Player > >>> SVN trunk.) > >> Not me. Which part of the cmake process is specifically causing the > >> delay? > >> > >> brian. > >> > > > > The step following the message for finding PythonInterp takes around 5 > > minutes and the one after finding PythonLibs seems to take around > 20. Each > > is accompanied by a pause with no output and no significant CPU usage or > > disk activity. > > |
From: gbiggs <gb...@ki...> - 2008-07-17 00:35:15
|
Can you try disabling the Python bindings for libplayerc (the option is BUILD_PYTHON_BINDINGS)? See how much of a delay you get then. Geoff Jeremy Asher wrote: > I'm not too clear on how the CMake configuration process works, but two > steps in the "===== Client Libraries =====" section are taking an incredibly > long amount of time. As I said earlier, the two pauses follow the reports > for finding PythonInterp and PythonLibs, so the activities that are being > performed after locating the two must be the culprits. Has anyone else > built on a PowerPC G5 running MacOS 10.5 or similar? > > Jeremy > > On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 08:15:53 0900 > pla...@li... wrote: >> So it's the finding Python stuff that takes the time, not the bits that >> use Python? >> >> I've built Player 2.2 on my 1.2GHz laptop with no problems at all so I >> doubt it's the computer speed. >> >> Geoff >> >> jr...@sf... wrote: >>> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 13:16:42 -0700 >>> pla...@li... wrote: >>>> On Jul 15, 2008, at 12:18 PM, Richard Vaughan wrote: >>>> >>>>> Folks, >>>>> >>>>> I just had a student build Player on an older machine. Older, but >>>>> still handy - a dual proc 1.8GHz Mac Pro w/ 1.5GB RAM. To my great >>>>> surprise, the python bits of the cmake config process took around 25 >>>>> minutes. Has anyone else seen behaviour like this? (Python 2.5, Player >>>>> SVN trunk.) >>>> Not me. Which part of the cmake process is specifically causing the > >>>> delay? >>>> >>>> brian. >>>> >>> The step following the message for finding PythonInterp takes around 5 >>> minutes and the one after finding PythonLibs seems to take around >> 20. Each >>> is accompanied by a pause with no output and no significant CPU usage or >>> disk activity. >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge > Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes > Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world > http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ > _______________________________________________ > Playerstage-developers mailing list > Pla...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/playerstage-developers > |
From: Jeremy A. <jr...@sf...> - 2008-07-17 18:07:09
Attachments:
cmake-dbg.txt
|
I did a little experimentation along those lines and discovered that the command cmake -D BUILD_PYTHON_BINDINGS:BOOL=OFF -D BUILD_PLAYERCC:BOOL=OFF .. gets me through without any delays. I've attached some output of cmake --debug-output .. if it's of any use in finding the problem. Jeremy On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 09:35:18 0900 pla...@li... wrote: > Can you try disabling the Python bindings for libplayerc (the option is > BUILD_PYTHON_BINDINGS)? See how much of a delay you get then. > > Geoff > > Jeremy Asher wrote: > > I'm not too clear on how the CMake configuration process works, but two > > steps in the "===== Client Libraries =====" section are taking an > incredibly > > long amount of time. As I said earlier, the two pauses follow the > reports > > for finding PythonInterp and PythonLibs, so the activities that are being > > performed after locating the two must be the culprits. Has anyone else > > built on a PowerPC G5 running MacOS 10.5 or similar? > > > > Jeremy > > > > On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 08:15:53 0900 > > pla...@li... wrote: > >> So it's the finding Python stuff that takes the time, not the bits that > >> use Python? > >> > >> I've built Player 2.2 on my 1.2GHz laptop with no problems at all so I > >> doubt it's the computer speed. > >> > >> Geoff > >> > >> jr...@sf... wrote: > >>> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 13:16:42 -0700 > >>> pla...@li... wrote: > >>>> On Jul 15, 2008, at 12:18 PM, Richard Vaughan wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Folks, > >>>>> > >>>>> I just had a student build Player on an older machine. Older, but > >>>>> still handy - a dual proc 1.8GHz Mac Pro w/ 1.5GB RAM. To my great > >>>>> surprise, the python bits of the cmake config process took around 25 > >>>>> minutes. Has anyone else seen behaviour like this? (Python 2.5, > Player > >>>>> SVN trunk.) > >>>> Not me. Which part of the cmake process is specifically causing the > > > >>>> delay? > >>>> > >>>> brian. > >>>> > >>> The step following the message for finding PythonInterp takes around 5 > >>> minutes and the one after finding PythonLibs seems to take around > >> 20. Each > >>> is accompanied by a pause with no output and no significant CPU > usage or > >>> disk activity. > >> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's > challenge > > Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win > great prizes > > Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in > the world > > http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ > > _______________________________________________ > > Playerstage-developers mailing list > > Pla...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/playerstage-developers > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's > challenge > Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great > prizes > Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world > http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ > _______________________________________________ > Playerstage-developers mailing list > Pla...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/playerstage-developers > |
From: gbiggs <gb...@ki...> - 2008-07-18 01:05:15
|
I'm afraid I don't have any answers for you, only more places for you to look. From the output you sent, it looks like there is somehow a delay in the FindSWIG.cmake module, when it looks for swig for the Python bindings, and in the FindBoost.cmake module when it looks for Boost for the C++ client library. Try commenting out the calls to these modules (the FIND_PACKAGE lines) and setting the variables they normally set to some suitable hard-coded data (like TRUE or /usr/share/swig or something like that - it doesn't need to build, just configure). If there's no delay that time, then at least we'll know where the problem lies. You could also try looking at these two modules and see if there are any similarities in them that may be causing the delay. Geoff Jeremy Asher wrote: > I did a little experimentation along those lines and discovered that the > command > > cmake -D BUILD_PYTHON_BINDINGS:BOOL=OFF -D BUILD_PLAYERCC:BOOL=OFF .. > > gets me through without any delays. I've attached some output of > > cmake --debug-output .. > > if it's of any use in finding the problem. > > > Jeremy > > On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 09:35:18 0900 > pla...@li... wrote: >> Can you try disabling the Python bindings for libplayerc (the option is >> BUILD_PYTHON_BINDINGS)? See how much of a delay you get then. >> >> Geoff >> >> Jeremy Asher wrote: >>> I'm not too clear on how the CMake configuration process works, but two >>> steps in the "===== Client Libraries =====" section are taking an >> incredibly >>> long amount of time. As I said earlier, the two pauses follow the >> reports >>> for finding PythonInterp and PythonLibs, so the activities that are > being >>> performed after locating the two must be the culprits. Has anyone > else >>> built on a PowerPC G5 running MacOS 10.5 or similar? >>> >>> Jeremy >>> >>> On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 08:15:53 0900 >>> pla...@li... wrote: >>>> So it's the finding Python stuff that takes the time, not the bits that > >>>> use Python? >>>> >>>> I've built Player 2.2 on my 1.2GHz laptop with no problems at all so I >>>> doubt it's the computer speed. >>>> >>>> Geoff >>>> >>>> jr...@sf... wrote: >>>>> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 13:16:42 -0700 >>>>> pla...@li... wrote: >>>>>> On Jul 15, 2008, at 12:18 PM, Richard Vaughan wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Folks, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I just had a student build Player on an older machine. Older, but >>>>>>> still handy - a dual proc 1.8GHz Mac Pro w/ 1.5GB RAM. To my great >>>>>>> surprise, the python bits of the cmake config process took around 25 >>>>>>> minutes. Has anyone else seen behaviour like this? (Python 2.5, >> Player >>>>>>> SVN trunk.) >>>>>> Not me. Which part of the cmake process is specifically causing the > >>> >>>>>> delay? >>>>>> >>>>>> brian. >>>>>> >>>>> The step following the message for finding PythonInterp takes around 5 >>>>> minutes and the one after finding PythonLibs seems to take around >>>> 20. Each >>>>> is accompanied by a pause with no output and no significant CPU >> usage or >>>>> disk activity. |
From: Geoffrey B. <gb...@ki...> - 2008-07-15 23:15:58
|
So it's the finding Python stuff that takes the time, not the bits that use Python? I've built Player 2.2 on my 1.2GHz laptop with no problems at all so I doubt it's the computer speed. Geoff jr...@sf... wrote: > On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 13:16:42 -0700 > pla...@li... wrote: >> On Jul 15, 2008, at 12:18 PM, Richard Vaughan wrote: >> >>> Folks, >>> >>> I just had a student build Player on an older machine. Older, but >>> still handy - a dual proc 1.8GHz Mac Pro w/ 1.5GB RAM. To my great >>> surprise, the python bits of the cmake config process took around 25 >>> minutes. Has anyone else seen behaviour like this? (Python 2.5, Player >>> SVN trunk.) >> Not me. Which part of the cmake process is specifically causing the >> delay? >> >> brian. >> > > The step following the message for finding PythonInterp takes around 5 > minutes and the one after finding PythonLibs seems to take around 20. Each > is accompanied by a pause with no output and no significant CPU usage or > disk activity. |