Re: [gentoo-user] Which openoffice

[Wolf Canis]

Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> 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.
>
How I said, everyone's own decision.
> 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).
>
I don't know a machine with the name thunderbird :-[ . But I started
with Gentoo
on a Toshiba Tecra 8100, that's a PIII Copermine 800MHz and 512 MB RAM.
In this
respect, I can say: Yes, I did. :-)     An emerge -e world lasted 11
hours, without OOO,
OOO alone needs 16 hours to build, _but_ that, for me, was the
fascinating thing -
The build runs faultless, not even this strange segfaults of
typesconfig. :-D
> 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 are bad experiences, but those things don't happened to me.
Perhaps God has an eye on me. :-D 
For me isn't the start time of a program that important, but that all
fits perfect together.
> That was not worth the trouble.
>
In your case, maybe.

>
>> 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.

That's absolutely right.

W. Canis