Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Harry Putnam <reader@×××××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: Size of portage tree
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 14:08:27
Message-Id: 877jd15mal.fsf@newsguy.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Size of portage tree by Etaoin Shrdlu
1 Etaoin Shrdlu <shrdlu@×××××××××××××.org> writes:
2
3 > On Wednesday 28 September 2005 14:43, glumtail wrote:
4 >
5 >> You can alway rm /usr/portage/distfiles/
6 >> Those files can be downloaded again when emerge.
7 >
8 > Also, the block size of the file system in which /usr/portage lives can
9 > make a big difference.
10 > Try a clean /usr/portage on an ext2/3 filesystem vs. a /usr/portage on
11 > reiserfs and you'll see what I mean.
12
13 I am using reiserfs but only on trial basis. I've noticed what
14 appears to be quite a large increase in time needed for fs intensive
15 things like du or rm -rf as compared to ext3 but I've done no real
16 comparison testing.
17
18 Have you noticed that too?
19
20 --
21 gentoo-user@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Size of portage tree "Hemmann
Reiserfs speed (Was: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Size of portage tree) Richard Fish <bigfish@××××××××××.org>