Hello !

I would file an issue on the Arch jami related packages, because they're not 
only outdated, but I believe due to that jami consumes way too much CPU, you 
listen to the fans working extra, and top shows 95% usage or more, no matter 
how fast your PC is.

The reason I don't is that my phone broke and I didn't have my aegis data 
backed somewhere and I can no longer login to Arch gitlab, and as long time ago 
it happened he same to me and I was warned they wouldn't help me out a 2nd 
time, oh well.

Anyone experiencing the same?  I see jami-qt marked as out of date, but I see 
no issues filed against it, same for jami-daemon.  opendht is not marked out of 
date, and the only issues is about C bindings, however opendht currently has a 
dependency problem, Arch moved to llhttp 9.3.0, however opendht was linked 
against llhttp 9.2:

% ldd /usr/lib/libopendht.so
        linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007ff662064000)
        libfmt.so.11 => /usr/lib/libfmt.so.11 (0x00007ff661ffa000)
        libllhttp.so.9.2 => /usr/lib/libllhttp.so.9.2 (0x00007ff661fe8000)

So the only way to currently support opendht is:

% grep IgnorePkg /etc/pacman.conf
# Pacman won't upgrade packages listed in IgnorePkg and members of IgnoreGroup
IgnorePkg   = llhttp libgit2 bat

Meaning avoid updates on those 3 packages given their dependency chain related to llhttp, 
since both libgit2 and bat new versions on Arch depend on llhttp 9.3 already except for 
opendht, which then requires a re-build.  BTW, current upstream opendht release is 
v3.4.0, meaning the Arch "1:3.2.0-2" ought an update anyways, meaning is also 
out of date, and by upgrading one gets the re-build required, :)

So all jami related packages out of date, jami the application consumes too 
much CPU, and opendht besides out of date requires a re-build to link against 
current repos llhttp.

Not sure how to notify the developers to deal with the jami current issues, 
perhaps someone could file issues on the packages, particularly opendht which 
doesn't even have an out of date mark.

Thanks a lot !

--
Javier

Reply via email to