Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Michael Mol <mikemol@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] LibreOffice 3.4.4: required HDD space
Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2011 19:19:51
Message-Id: CA+czFiARO9tBFUnk2PWmHx9xk5O6gU0mDc+=9RNsBevYx0KNcw@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] LibreOffice 3.4.4: required HDD space by v_2e@ukr.net
1 On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 2:07 PM, <v_2e@×××.net> wrote:
2 >  Hello!
3 >
4 > On Sun, 20 Nov 2011 09:07:33 -0500
5 > Michael Mol <mikemol@×××××.com> wrote:
6 >>
7 >> I'll venture a guess that it may have approached 9GB either with some
8 >> short-lived files, or *would* have approached 9GB with a different USE
9 >> flag or other configuration combination.
10 >>  ...
11 >> Ok, then I'll narrow my guess to the size required being dependent on
12 >> USE flag combinations.
13 >>
14 >  Yes, I thought so too, but I use the same set of USE flags for quite
15 > a long time, and previous versions of LO really needed the stated
16 > amount of free space. At least, more than 6 GB. And the last version
17 > (3.4.4) not only needs about a half of the stated space, it needs
18 > *less* space than the previous versions.
19 >  It may mean that the newer version is *substantially* reworked
20 > though, which is very good. :)
21
22 I forget the name of the tool that predicts compile times based on
23 package sets and USE flags. Perhaps it could be expanded to collect
24 data and predict disk requirements? It'd almost require stracing the
25 compile process tree or FAMing the build directory tree, though;
26 polling with 'du' might miss a peak usage point. (And would certainly
27 slow things down)
28
29 --
30 :wq