Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: unable to emerge anything

[Beso]

2008/2/6, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net>:
>
> Beso <givemesugarr@×××××.com> posted
> d257c3560802060625o3261f5cfw4eec6d5718e3bad9@××××××××××.com, excerpted
> below, on  Wed, 06 Feb 2008 14:25:24 +0000:
> >> What about -mno-tls-direct-seg-refs?  Why do you use that?
> >
> > this should help with virtualizazion apps. xen won't work well without
> > it with large system memory. without xen or other virt apps this
> > shouldn't influence much on the packages.
>
> OK, that answers /that/ question.  My CPUs, being Opteron 290s, aren't of
> the virtualization instruction generation yet, and I've kind of avoided
> it for that reason.  Thus, the flag above isn't something I need to worry
> about.  Thanks!


on processors with virt instruction it should be mandatory and on system
without them this option would speed-up the virtualization to about 50%. in
fact the xen ebuild also says this.

> yep, i'll try out [-j, unlimited jobs] someday.
> > for the moment i'm planning a disk
> > change, mine has already 2 years and its overall health is starting to
> > be heard when writing or reading data from the disk.
>
> Ouch!  Unfortunately, my last couple disks didn't really get to that
> point.  The last one in particular got too hot after the A/C died on a
> summer day when I was out, here in Phoenix.  The room air temp could have
> gotten to well over 50 C, so who knows how hot the disk got!  Fortunately
> I had the disk partitioned decently and unmounted backup partitions of
> most stuff, which was generally retrievable.  I was even able to run the
> thing in operation for awhile after it cooled back down -- NOT using the
> partitions that the head had crashed on due to the heat, of course, but I
> replaced it as soon as I could scrap the money together.


i won't use raid, since i'm on notebook. so raid doesn't has a reason to be
since it won't work. lvm2 instead would be installed. also it seems that my
notebook is able to boot external disks and for that reason i might put a
root copy on the external disk.

> i've got an
> > external bigger disk that i'll partition with tmpfs for paludis and
> > portage. the only thing that i still don't know is:
>
> > 1. can i put on more than one different tmpfs?!
>
> Yes.  I'm actually running several, /dev (udev), max size 2 MB, /dev/shm
> (FHS but used only by portage for PORTAGE_TMPFS, not to be confused with
> PORTAGE_TMPDIR and PKG_TMPDIR), max 50 MB, /lib64/rcscripts/init.d (old
> entry, now inactive, old baselayout-1.x), max 512 KB, and my big one, /
> tmp, 6 GB.  /var/tmp is actually a symlink to the 6 gig /tmp, and both
> PORTAGE_TMPDIR and PKG_TMPDIR point to /tmp.  (Note that ccache's dir is
> inside PORTAGE_TMPDIR by default according to make.conf.example.  You'll
> want to put it elsewhere, OUTSIDE the tmpfs, so it doesn't die at reboot,
> rather defeating the purpose.)


this is interesting.

2. if i put one tmpfs and symlink there what i do want to use on tmpfs is
> better?!
>
> I can't quite get that question to parse.  However... remember that while
> you can have multiple tmpfs mounted, if you might be using both at once,
> you need to consider the total effect on memory.  Thus, it's probably
> better to only have one big (multi-gig) one, and point other things at it
> if necessary.  I've used symlinks (as with /var/tmp above), but mount --
> bind /should/ work as well, AFAIK.
>
> While we're talking symlinks, this is for cache not tmp, but it may be
> worth mentioning that I have one filesystem containing all my system
> cache stuff on RAID-0, that is, CCACHE_DIR, PORTDIR (including layman's
> subdirs and DISTDIR but not PKGDIR), and /usr/src.  Those are
> traditionally in various separate locations, but here, I have them all as
> subdirs on the same RAID-0 backed filesystem for speed and because they
> don't need redundancy.  CCACHE_DIR and PORTDIR can of course be reset to
> point to the desired subdirs directly, but /usr/src is a symlink to the
> appropriate subdir on my RAID-0, which I have mounted as /str (for
> striped).  So /usr/src -> /str/usrsrc as a symlink.  I also symlink most
> of my frequently used dirs directly from root, too.  So /h -> /home
> (actually, the reverse, I mount my home filesystem on /h, and /home -> /
> h), /usr/local -> /l, /var/log -> /log, /usr/portage -> /p -> /str/
> portage, etc.  Saves a lot of typing that way, as I can refer to /l/bin/
> script or /log/messages or /p/profiles/package.mask, for instance.
>
> Symlinks are SO useful; I'm STILL trying to figure out how I survived a
> decade on MS without them!  (Actually, by W98 time, I was using a third
> party Explorer extension that allowed one to create custom system
> folders, much like My Computer is as shipped, but of course that was
> only /sort/ of like symlinks, I had yet to discover the power of the real
> thing! =8^)  Of course, since the advent of --bind and friends as options
> to mount, basically the same thing could be accomplished with it by mount
> --binding the subdirs as necessary, but I don't think MS does that
> either, and symlinks work, so that's what I've used.


yep you're quite right on synlinks. it seems that vista has something
similar.


-- 
dott. ing. beso