| 1 |
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Nikos Chantziaras <realnc@×××××.de> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 23/02/12 12:44, Mick wrote: |
| 3 |
>> |
| 4 |
>> On Thursday 23 Feb 2012 10:22:40 Willie WY Wong wrote: |
| 5 |
>>> |
| 6 |
>>> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 07:22:27PM -0500, Penguin Lover Philip Webb |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> squawked: |
| 9 |
>>>> |
| 10 |
>>>> I compiled FF 10.0.1 on amd64 without any problems : |
| 11 |
>>>> it needed 3,61 GB disk space for the link stage |
| 12 |
>>>> & most/all of my 2 GB memory. |
| 13 |
>>> |
| 14 |
>>> |
| 15 |
>>> Argh. 3.6 diskspace and 2G memory? I guess it is finally getting to |
| 16 |
>>> the point that my laptop cannot build firefox. Time to switch to the |
| 17 |
>>> -bin I guess. |
| 18 |
>> |
| 19 |
>> |
| 20 |
>> I've only got something like 625M RAM and around 4G disk space (for |
| 21 |
>> var/portage). I used 750M from that 4G for adding swap. Eventually FF |
| 22 |
>> compiled fine. |
| 23 |
>> |
| 24 |
>> The irony is that older boxen which would benefit most from building from |
| 25 |
>> source are constrained in resources to achieve this and have to resort to |
| 26 |
>> installing bin packages. |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> I doubt that the bin package will be slower than the one compiled from |
| 30 |
> source. I predict the reverse, in fact. The bin package will perform |
| 31 |
> better. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
That seems a strange prediction. What drives that hunch? |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
:wq |
Archives