| 1 |
I'll agree here: I sometimes download a new binary to test before seeing |
| 2 |
if I really want it - then compile it. Compiled is usually subjectively |
| 3 |
faster, and definitely more stable. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
Besides, as someone else put it, its more fun ... |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
BillK |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 09:00 +0100, Uwe Klosa wrote: |
| 11 |
> I have used both versions. The compiled version seems to be more stable on my system. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Uwe |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Kristian Poul Herkild wrote: |
| 16 |
> > Joseph wrote: |
| 17 |
> > |
| 18 |
> >> Is there a benefit of compiling Openoffice 2.0 vs. installing from |
| 19 |
> >> binary. |
| 20 |
> >> |
| 21 |
> >> I've AMD 1.8Mhz with 1Gb or Ram and it has been compiling OO 2.0 for |
| 22 |
> >> 7-hours already. |
| 23 |
> >> |
| 24 |
> >> |
| 25 |
> >> |
| 26 |
> > It's likely to take somewhere around 8-11 hours on such a machine. It |
| 27 |
> > took somewhere around 10 hours for me on a 1500 MHz Athlon XP with 1 GB |
| 28 |
> > RAM. |
| 29 |
> > |
| 30 |
> > Whether or not you can benefit from compiling is unknown to me. But it's |
| 31 |
> > more fun ;) |
| 32 |
> > |
| 33 |
> > - |
| 34 |
> > Kristian Poul Herkild |
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
William Kenworthy <billk@×××××××××.au> |
| 37 |
Home! |
| 38 |
-- |
| 39 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives