Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> 2. Remove "-L--no-warn-search-mismatch"

Note for readers: this is in dmd.conf and is a relatively new thing. My dmd 2.051 and older installs always worked, but with the 2.053 beta I just played with, had to make this change as well as recompile dmd for stupid centos to work with it.

>  CentOS 4.2 (or maybe it's just KDE) runs so slow in a VM

KDE sucks. The best thing to do is probably to not bother with a gui in the vm at all as well as to not use the virtual machine screen - they are slow as sin.

Instead, run sshd on the linux vm, make inbound networking work to port 22 (however you do that in virtual box) and then access it through PuTTY or something.

That way, you bypass the slow ass VM graphics entirely.


(similarly, if you virtualize Windows, Remote Desktop into the
VM works a lot better than the vm's own graphics in my experience).

"Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator@gmail.com> wrote in message news:iqa7bi$1djh$1@digitalmars.com...
> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> 2. Remove "-L--no-warn-search-mismatch"
>
> Note for readers: this is in dmd.conf and is a relatively new thing. My dmd 2.051 and older installs always worked, but with the 2.053 beta I just played with, had to make this change as well as recompile dmd for stupid centos to work with it.
>

Do we know what that switch is for? Just curious.

>>  CentOS 4.2 (or maybe it's just KDE) runs so slow in a VM
>
> KDE sucks. The best thing to do is probably to not bother with a gui in the vm at all as well as to not use the virtual machine screen - they are slow as sin.
>

Actually I just realized it was Gnome. (I don't know I could have mixed those two up...)

> Instead, run sshd on the linux vm, make inbound networking work to port 22 (however you do that in virtual box) and then access it through PuTTY or something.
>
> That way, you bypass the slow ass VM graphics entirely.
>
>
> (similarly, if you virtualize Windows, Remote Desktop into the
> VM works a lot better than the vm's own graphics in my experience).

XP seems to work fine for me in VirtualBox (And my CPU doesn't even have hardware virtualization support). But I may go ahead and try something like you're suggesting.

Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> Do we know what that switch is for?
 --no-warn-search-mismatch
   Normally ld will give a warning if it finds an incompatible library
   during a library search.  This option silences the warning.

In the DMD changelog, there was a note about making the linker
a little less noisy. I assume that's the reasoning behind the change.

> Actually I just realized it was Gnome.

Gnome sucks too!

(I actually run a mostly custom linux gui. Customly hacked up window manager, custom theme, custom taskbar, hacked up terminals, hacked up IM client.... my own linux install is one of the very few on the planet that doesn't suck ass. It still sucks, mind you, just not ass anymore.)

> XP seems to work fine for me in VirtualBox

Yeah, it's not bad on my comp either, but I always find some annoying lag as menus pop up and things like that.

Other benefits of remote desktop though are easier sound and file/clipboard sharing without installing anything in the guest.

Whatever floats your boat, but after I tried out the remote desktop strategy I was very pleased.

On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 11:01 PM, Adam D. Ruppe <destructionator@gmail.com>wrote:

> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> > Do we know what that switch is for?
>  --no-warn-search-mismatch
>   Normally ld will give a warning if it finds an incompatible library
>   during a library search.  This option silences the warning.
>
> In the DMD changelog, there was a note about making the linker
> a little less noisy. I assume that's the reasoning behind the change.
>
> > Actually I just realized it was Gnome.
>
> Gnome sucks too!
>
> (I actually run a mostly custom linux gui. Customly hacked up window manager, custom theme, custom taskbar, hacked up terminals, hacked up IM client.... my own linux install is one of the very few on the planet that doesn't suck ass. It still sucks, mind you, just not ass anymore.)
>
> > XP seems to work fine for me in VirtualBox
>
> Yeah, it's not bad on my comp either, but I always find some annoying lag as menus pop up and things like that.
>
> Other benefits of remote desktop though are easier sound and file/clipboard sharing without installing anything in the guest.
>
> Whatever floats your boat, but after I tried out the remote desktop strategy I was very pleased.
>

I run Arch/Gnome in Virtualbox and get reasonable performance. There's some
menu lag, but it's not significant enough to bother me too much. It may just
be that my standards are lower :D
Virtualbox's guest additions and accelerated video definitely made a
difference for me, although apparently they don't yet support enough OpenGL
calls to allow Gnome 3's shell to run in a VM.

"Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator@gmail.com> wrote in message news:iqadbi$m16$1@digitalmars.com...
> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> Do we know what that switch is for?
> --no-warn-search-mismatch
>   Normally ld will give a warning if it finds an incompatible library
>   during a library search.  This option silences the warning.
>
> In the DMD changelog, there was a note about making the linker
> a little less noisy. I assume that's the reasoning behind the change.
>

Well I feel a little better about that, then. I was (perhaps irrationally) worried it might be something that was required by some major thing in dmd/druntime/phobos that my "hello world" just happened to not use.

>> Actually I just realized it was Gnome.
>
> Gnome sucks too!
>
> (I actually run a mostly custom linux gui. Customly hacked up window manager, custom theme, custom taskbar, hacked up terminals, hacked up IM client.... my own linux install is one of the very few on the planet that doesn't suck ass. It still sucks, mind you, just not ass anymore.)
>

Heh. Hardcore :)  I've actually come close to making my own IM client out of frustration, but libpidgin was a pain, and then everyone I knew abandoned IM so they could shell out money for SMS (Go figure). I finally stopped even bothering to run Pidgin a few weeks ago since it had been about a year since anyone on my list had even been on.

But yea.  When I was on Ubuntu 9.04 (or was it 9.06?) I was getting tired of a few annoying little Gnome quirks here and there. It was pretty zippy with the NVidia drivers and hardware accel though, and I got a real kick out of the...ummm...what my brother called "jelly windows". I'm not normally an eye-candy guy (at least not these days - I used to be), but I never got tired of that feature :) But when I tried upgrading to 10.04, the jelly windows suddenly worked like crap (ie, ultra-slow) no matter what I did. Plus, again, I was getting tired of some other weird Gnome quirks, so I ended up going with Kubuntu 10.04 instead of Ubuntu 10.04 (and gave up on my beloved jelly windows entirely :( )

Unfortunately, KDE 4 has turned out to be even worse. And I know it had a notably botched introduction and then got better, but I have 4.5 running on my machine and it's still by far the buggiest, most inconsistent window manager I've ever used. I think I'd actually be happier with CDE: It had an incredibly bizarre UI, but at least it seemed to run smoothly and consistently once you learned how to work it. Compared to KDE4 anyway.

Then there's Gnome 3 which I've never used, but it sounds terrible. And then Ubuntu's upcoming Unity (I think that's what it's called?) just looks like iOS/Android to me, and I can't stand those devices. (I really, really miss PalmOS. It's the only OS in existence I can honestly say I genuinely like. Not perfect (especially with Grafitti 2 replacing Grafitti1), but overall very good and the upcoming versions were looking great before they killed it off in favor of that WebOS junk. Boy did I get offtopic there...)

So anyway, I'm getting ready to try going Debian+XFCE (for my actual physical linux box). I had tried Xubuntu about a couple years ago, but probably the biggest problem I had with it was the fact I still ended up needing to use at least a few Gnome and KDE apps, so all that bloat just got loaded in anyway and also made the desktop that much more inconsistent. Meh. Oh well. Maybe I'll be happier this time around. And if not, maybe I'll try Trinity DE. It's got to at least be better than KDE 4. Lol, or maybe I'll go back to blackbox ;)

Unfortunately, I don't have the time or patience to do any heavy customizing/configuring. If I did, I might not have been driven away from Linux when I first tried it ten years ago. :/

>> XP seems to work fine for me in VirtualBox
>
> Yeah, it's not bad on my comp either, but I always find some annoying lag as menus pop up and things like that.
>
> Other benefits of remote desktop though are easier sound and file/clipboard sharing without installing anything in the guest.
>
> Whatever floats your boat, but after I tried out the remote desktop strategy I was very pleased.

I've been hesitent to bother figuring out how to set up such things with a VM since the built-in GUI seemed to at least basically work. But yea, maybe I'll give those things a shot. After all, I did at least manage to figure out how to work VirtualBox's shared folders :)

"Andrew Wiley" <wiley.andrew.j@gmail.com> wrote in message news:mailman.96.1305003352.14074.digitalmars-d-learn@puremagic.com...
>
> I run Arch/Gnome in Virtualbox and get reasonable performance. There's
> some
> menu lag, but it's not significant enough to bother me too much. It may
> just
> be that my standards are lower :D

Nah, more likely your CPU just runs circles around mine. I'm pretty well known around here for running on "antique" hardware ;)

> Virtualbox's guest additions and accelerated video definitely made a
> difference for me, although apparently they don't yet support enough
> OpenGL
> calls to allow Gnome 3's shell to run in a VM.
>

Yea, Virtualbox's guest additions are freaking awesome :)

"Nick Sabalausky" <a@a.a> wrote in message news:iq9ujn$111t$1@digitalmars.com...
>
> If anyone's curious, I did get a basic D cgi app to work, too (ie, Compiling on CentOS 4.2 in a VM and uploading to my shared host server), but I had to:
>
> 1. Recompile DMD (Because the precompiled DMD would immediately quit with a "Floating point exception" message, even if called with zero args).
>
> 2. Remove "-L--no-warn-search-mismatch" (Because otherwise, when it tried to link, the GCC in CentOS 4.2 would error out and complain that wasn't a valid switch.)
>
> As a little bonus, the C test app I compiled in the CentOS 4.2 VM also ran fine on my physical Kubuntu 10.04 box. Although the D one segfaulted. No big deal deal though, it's easy enough to compile on that box.
>
> The only problem I'm having now (aside from the fact that I haven't attempted to deal with the other shared host server yet - the debian one from the horrible ipower company),

Damn, it seems that ipower's CGI support is limited to perl and python (even though they conveniently make no mention of that anywhere except *inside* the logged-in member-only section). Oh well, maybe I'll luck out and be able to convine the client to use a less sucky host on my second attempt :/  But I dunno, he seems to be pretty in love with them.

Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> I've actually come close to making my own IM client out of frustration, but libpidgin was a pain

Hah, I started one as well, with only aim support. It actually kinda works (and written in D), but I keep changing my D gui stuff around (this program is one of the D Windowing System test apps, which changes then stagnates then changes then is tabled then changes...) that it's not really usable.

I basically settled for gaim 1.5 with a few modifications. Annoyingly, bugs have crept in as the stupid gtk or glib updates and gaim doesn't, but I know it's limits so if it crashes when I close a tab, I just don't close tabs like that.


Gaim is one of those programs that went to pure crap with a new version though. Pidgin, gaim 2.0, is just utterly unusable to me.

>  Lol, or maybe I'll go back to blackbox ;)

Blackbox rocks. It's what I used as my starting point. Actually, my custom WM is a fairly short diff from blackbox. It's biggest shortcoming, but that's a gift as well as a curse - it leaves the door open to put in a customized one!

> Unfortunately, I don't have the time or patience to do any heavy customizing/configuring. If I did, I might not have been driven away from Linux when I first tried it ten years ago.

What happened with me is I kinda locked myself into it. Switching away would be an even bigger hassle due to moving files and such, so I stuck with it, slowly excising the worst of the suck.

The thing that still pisses me off beyond belief is something I can't fix myself - interoperability, the topic of this thread.

(see I'm still on topic!)

"Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator@gmail.com> wrote in message news:iqbjs4$2vrm$1@digitalmars.com...
> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> I've actually come close to making my own IM client out of frustration, but libpidgin was a pain
>
> Hah, I started one as well, with only aim support. It actually kinda works (and written in D), but I keep changing my D gui stuff around (this program is one of the D Windowing System test apps, which changes then stagnates then changes then is tabled then changes...) that it's not really usable.
>
> I basically settled for gaim 1.5 with a few modifications. Annoyingly, bugs have crept in as the stupid gtk or glib updates and gaim doesn't, but I know it's limits so if it crashes when I close a tab, I just don't close tabs like that.
>
>
> Gaim is one of those programs that went to pure crap with a new version though. Pidgin, gaim 2.0, is just utterly unusable to me.
>

I found it basically usable (back when there were actually other people on it ;) ), but it's inability to use the default away message, or even just log in, without it sitting there first doing nothing but waiting for a custom message that I'd never type in annoyed the hell out of me. There were a few other annoyances, too, like how the table in the "saved statuses" screen sets the vertical-align of each cell to middle instead of top. (I hate it when web pages do it, and now a desktop app is doing it, too?)

It might be better for me though, because I run it on windows, so I rarely have GTK getting updated behind Pidgin's back.

I could come up with a huge list of programs that just get worse with newer releases...iTunes, FireFox, pretty much anything from Adobe, Windows (post-XP anyway), Nero, Roxio, KDE3->KDE4, Azureus->Vuze, McAffee (It's hard to imagine there was ever a time it wasn't worse than the disease), Visual Studio, id Software FPSes after Doom 2 (although they didn't actually reach "bad" until Q3A), all just off the top of my head.

>>  Lol, or maybe I'll go back to blackbox ;)
>
> Blackbox rocks. It's what I used as my starting point. Actually, my custom WM is a fairly short diff from blackbox. It's biggest shortcoming, but that's a gift as well as a curse - it leaves the door open to put in a customized one!
>

Yea, I used Blackbox a little bit when I first tried Linux ten years ago. It held it's own pretty well against the alternatives.

>> Unfortunately, I don't have the time or patience to do any heavy customizing/configuring. If I did, I might not have been driven away from Linux when I first tried it ten years ago.
>
> What happened with me is I kinda locked myself into it. Switching away would be an even bigger hassle due to moving files and such, so I stuck with it, slowly excising the worst of the suck.
>
> The thing that still pisses me off beyond belief is something I can't fix myself - interoperability, the topic of this thread.
>
> (see I'm still on topic!)

Heh :) And then I go mercilessly killing the topic ;)

On 10/05/2011 04:48, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> "Adam D. Ruppe"<destructionator@gmail.com>  wrote in message
> news:iqa7bi$1djh$1@digitalmars.com...
>> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>>> 2. Remove "-L--no-warn-search-mismatch"
>>
>> Note for readers: this is in dmd.conf and is a relatively new thing.
>> My dmd 2.051 and older installs always worked, but with the 2.053
>> beta I just played with, had to make this change as well as
>> recompile dmd for stupid centos to work with it.
>>
>
> Do we know what that switch is for? Just curious.

I believe it was added along side 64 bit support so the linker didn't complain about both 64 bit and 32 bit libraries being available. Or something like that.

-- 
Robert
http://octarineparrot.com/