| 1 |
On Sun, Dec 04, 2011 at 03:40:01PM +0100, Michael Mol wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 8:44 AM, Harry Putnam <reader@×××××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> > For the OP, a few posters have mentioned that under gentoo, every |
| 5 |
> > thing is compiled from scratch, but it was not made clear that it |
| 6 |
> > happens again and again at most updates. |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > No one has made clear that there is a very HUGE amount of time sunk |
| 9 |
> > into compiling absolutely everything. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> I'd say "bull", but that depends *greatly* on your hardware. When I |
| 12 |
> talk about Gentoo with my friends, they admit to having tried it, but |
| 13 |
> then say it took them a long, long time to build a system on their |
| 14 |
> 486. You don't want to run Gentoo compiles on a 486. You probably |
| 15 |
> ought not to run Gentoo compiles on any x86 processor older than an |
| 16 |
> Athlon64 or Intel Core chip. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
I have gentoo on a few machines here, including a Pentium-M powered |
| 20 |
Thinkpad (single core, 1.7GHz) and a G4 eMac (single core PPC, 1.25GHz). |
| 21 |
They handle it just fine, though it does take awhile to update of |
| 22 |
course. Never the "two or three days" people love to cry about, but then |
| 23 |
I don't use gnome or kde, so maybe it would if I did... As long as I |
| 24 |
keep them updated weekly, it rarely takes more than four hours and often |
| 25 |
takes as little as 60-90 minutes. I'm using fvwm these days, in case |
| 26 |
anyone's curious. Lot of work to set up, but it does everything |
| 27 |
extremely well once configured. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
The difference in the performance with gentoo on a lower spec machine |
| 30 |
does make it pretty worthwhile to suffer the updates, IMO. |
| 31 |
In fact, I like gentoo and FreeBSD best for low-spoec hardware. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
YMMV of course... |
| 34 |
:) |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
caveat utilitor |
| 38 |
♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ |
Archives