| 1 |
On Wednesday 31 January 2007 14:22, Uwe Thiem wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 31 January 2007 13:02, Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Tuesday 30 January 2007 16:06, Uwe Thiem wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > What are the specs of your box? |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > Dell Latitude D810 |
| 7 |
> > 2GHz Centrino |
| 8 |
> > 2GB Ram |
| 9 |
> > 80G SATA |
| 10 |
> > 2.6.19-suspend2-r1 |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Odd. My 2.8GHz Pentium 4 takes *far* longer to compile OO, something |
| 13 |
> close to 10h, though I haven't really timed it. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Intuition tells me that on my machine emerging OOo must do a lot of |
| 16 |
stuff my machine is fast at, and relatively little that it's slow at. I |
| 17 |
know for a fact it's got a nippy cpu and lots of ram, but disk IO is |
| 18 |
much slower than it ought to be. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Also, my times come from genlop, and I may well have moved between home |
| 21 |
and office networks, and I can't guarantee that both networks have ntp |
| 22 |
servers exactly synced |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
> > But, OOo is a well known resource hog that really stresses a |
| 25 |
> > machine when compiling, so I don't think it makes a useful measure |
| 26 |
> > of anything. And KDE-meta isn't much better these days either. |
| 27 |
> > Yesterdays sync brought in 3.5.6 and 3 or 4 other bits and pieces, |
| 28 |
> > which I started at 1am this morning. It's just finished now at 1pm |
| 29 |
> > - 12 hours! |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> KDE is in so far better as it doesn't forbit parallel compiling - as |
| 32 |
> OO does. So I can use distcc and let all my boxes contribute. That |
| 33 |
> brings the compile time of KDE down a lot. Unfortunately, that isn't |
| 34 |
> possible with OO. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
kde-meta also runs ./configure something like 300 times :-) which is |
| 37 |
very disk intensive and my machine sucks at that |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
alan |
| 40 |
-- |
| 41 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives