Re: [gentoo-user] Which openoffice

[Volker Armin Hemmann]

On Montag, 5. Mai 2008, Wolf Canis wrote:
> Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> > On Montag, 5. Mai 2008, Wolf Canis wrote:
> >> Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> >>> extremly long. So long that you have to start ooo several times a day
> >>> for a year so that the saved startup time equalizes the time spent
> >>> compiling it.
> >>
> >> "ccache" in make.conf is enabled and MAKEOPTS has a reasonable value, I
> >> have set it
> >> to "-j2". I follow the rule MAKEOPTS=<number CPUS>. But in the case of
> >> openoffice, the
> >> ebuild overwrite this value  with "-j1". For the version 2.3.x I had set
> >> the variable
> >> WANT_MP but with version 2.4  it breaks the build. But how you can see
> >> in the following,
> >> that's only a minor problem.
> >
> > or not. So everything bigger than -j1 breaks the built. Which makes dual
> > core cpus useless to speed up compilation.
>
> Not really, because if you have set -pipe in CFLAGS than you can
> easily, with top, check how the cpus are used. But that's it, of course.
>
> How I mentioned earlier with version 2.3.x I had set WANT_MP=true
> and MAKEOPTS=-j2 (and with my first builds -j4 and -j5 but that was pretty
> much useless, because the processes are hinder them self but they don't
> break
> the build) and that works for me. The only problem which  occurred was this
>
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=210065
>
> >> wolf-di6400 0(0) 03:04 PM  ~ # qlop -gH openoffice
> >> openoffice: Fri May  2 16:22:23 2008: 1 hour, 20 minutes, 38 seconds
> >> openoffice: Sat May  3 04:06:11 2008: 1 hour, 19 minutes, 12 seconds
> >> openoffice: 2 times
> >
> > emerge -p openoffice-bin|genlop -p
> > These are the pretended packages: (this may take a while; wait...)
> >
> > [ebuild   R   ] app-office/openoffice-bin-2.4.0
> >
> >
> > Estimated update time: 2 minutes.
>
> Yeh, of course is that faster but why we use Gentoo? Because
> of the fast binary install? ;-)

with packages that are only needed once in a while (ooo, frickelfox) binaries 
might be the right thing to do.

I have compiled ooo in the past - on much, much slower machines. Ever compiled 
it on a 900mhz thunderbird? I did (and later faster cpus, of course). 
Inclusive seeing it fail after 8h because the wrong java version was 
installed. It took less time to emerge ALL of kde than ooo. And one day I 
compared the differences. ooo started maybe 3 seconds faster than ooo-bin. As 
soon as started, no difference at all.

That was not worth the trouble.

> Although I conduct all emerges at the console _not_ in X. Perhaps
> that's it. However, every user should do how he/she likes.

it does not matter where - ooo is huge - bloated. And whereever you emerge it, 
it is the package needing the most time.


-- 
gentoo-user@l.g.o mailing list