| 1 |
Apparently, though unproven, at 17:09 on Thursday 27 January 2011, Nikos |
| 2 |
Chantziaras did opine thusly: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On 01/27/2011 04:53 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote: |
| 5 |
> > On Thu, 27 Jan 2011 16:30:30 +0200, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: |
| 6 |
> >>> Using --jobs does a better job of making use of your CPU because one |
| 7 |
> >>> package can use it fully for compiling while another is configuring. |
| 8 |
> >> |
| 9 |
> >> And what about the last package? The time you gained for faster |
| 10 |
> >> configure and install (which don't take too much time anyway) is wasted |
| 11 |
> >> again on the last package. |
| 12 |
> > |
| 13 |
> > So on a 20 package world update, only 19 are faster while the 20th runs |
| 14 |
> > at the same speed? Where's the loss there? Even if the last were slower, |
| 15 |
> > it would be worth it. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> Given the amount of time unpack/configure/install of most packages needs |
| 18 |
> (very short), my observation is that it would not be worth it. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
KDE. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
unpack/configure/install takes up a significant amount of time for KDE |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com |
Archives