Skip to content

Conversation

@ndpm13
Copy link
Contributor

@ndpm13 ndpm13 commented Jan 9, 2026

Testing the changes

  • I tested the changes in this PR: briefly

Local build testing

  • I built this PR locally for my native architecture, (x86_64-glibc)

@chrysos349

@oreo639
Copy link
Member

oreo639 commented Jan 9, 2026

  • I tested the changes in this PR: NO

Loupe needs to be updated.

@ndpm13
Copy link
Contributor Author

ndpm13 commented Jan 9, 2026

  • I tested the changes in this PR: NO

You should test PRs before submitting them. As-is this breaks loupe.

even when the PR is a draft?

@oreo639
Copy link
Member

oreo639 commented Jan 9, 2026

even when the PR is a draft?

Ideally, yes. It should be tested locally along with its dependents first.
Draft just means "don't merge" which can be the case for a variety of reasons.

@ndpm13
Copy link
Contributor Author

ndpm13 commented Jan 9, 2026

even when the PR is a draft?

Ideally, yes. It should be tested locally along with its dependents first. Draft just means "don't merge" which can be the case for a variety of reasons.

Noted 👍

@ndpm13
Copy link
Contributor Author

ndpm13 commented Jan 9, 2026

Also if the loupe thing is gonna be a problem should I just make this glycin-2 ?

@oreo639
Copy link
Member

oreo639 commented Jan 9, 2026

Also if the loupe thing is gonna be a problem should I just make this glycin-2 ?

No, in this case loupe should be updated in this PR.
Although, I assume glycin 2.x will also break fractal which should also be updated.

@ndpm13
Copy link
Contributor Author

ndpm13 commented Jan 10, 2026

Also if the loupe thing is gonna be a problem should I just make this glycin-2 ?

No, in this case loupe should be updated in this PR. Although, I assume glycin 2.x will also break fractal which should also be updated.

is a version bump like this good enough?

@ndpm13 ndpm13 closed this Jan 10, 2026
@ndpm13 ndpm13 deleted the glycin branch January 10, 2026 13:40
@ndpm13 ndpm13 restored the glycin branch January 10, 2026 14:31
@ndpm13 ndpm13 reopened this Jan 10, 2026
@ndpm13 ndpm13 marked this pull request as ready for review January 10, 2026 14:33
@balejk
Copy link
Contributor

balejk commented Jan 11, 2026

Ad the fractal update: have a look at https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/pull/56776/files, you could also include the unbreaking and the rebuild prevention.

@ndpm13
Copy link
Contributor Author

ndpm13 commented Jan 11, 2026

Ad the fractal update: have a look at https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/pull/56776/files, you could also include the unbreaking and the rebuild prevention.

doesn't seem to do the trick, I got 16 GB of RAM on my machine and I keep running out of memory

@balejk
Copy link
Contributor

balejk commented Jan 11, 2026 via email

@ndpm13
Copy link
Contributor Author

ndpm13 commented Jan 11, 2026

From my experience, you need at least some 24 GiB of RAM to compile it for the archs that I was able to do it for. I left the others marked as broken because I was not able to compile it for them with 32 GiB of RAM.

That's kinda messed up 💀
I think I'll just skip Fractal for now....

@classabbyamp
Copy link
Member

in #58506 I got it down to 5GB required to build with -j1. takes a little more if you have higher -j

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants