| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 27174
Location: 56N 3W
|
 Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2010 7:37 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Mike Hunt,
eclean-pkg -d defeats the purpose as you want the old versions that this command removes.
I'm not sure how big packages grows, I'll look when I power up my old box next. It has about five years worth of packages that have never been cleaned.
_________________
Regards,
NeddySeagoon
Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Shining Arcanine
Veteran
Joined: 24 Sep 2009
Posts: 1110
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 4:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I finally got around to trying FEATURES="buildpkg" out today. To avoid having to recompile my already recompiled stuff, I used quickpkg to build binaries some things that take a while to compile from my filesystem. I did this for chromium, gcc, firefox and openoffice. The only thing that worries me is that it excluded a config file from gcc, which I then overrided and had it include. I probably should just remove the binary package and then emerge GCC to make sure that I have a "perfect" binary package on my system, but I figured I would ask here about it for future reference.
| Quote: | new-host-2 ~ # quickpkg gcc
* Building package for sys-devel/gcc-4.4.2 ... [ ok ]
* Excluded config: '/etc/eselect/compiler/i686-pc-linux-gnu-4.4.2.conf'
* Packages now in '/usr/portage/packages':
* sys-devel/gcc-4.4.2: 16.2M
* Excluded config files: 1
* See --help if you would like to include config files. |
I have never modified /etc/eselect/compiler/i686-pc-linux-gnu-4.4.2.conf, so should I assume it is safe to include? Would it be included by default if I had just done emerge gcc and let portage make the binary package during the compilation?
Also, is there any point to using ccache if you use FEATURES="buildpkg"? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 27174
Location: 56N 3W
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 4:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Shining Arcanine,
ccache speeds up second and subsequent builds of the same package, when much of the compiler output is already in the cache, so yes, still use ccache.
_________________
Regards,
NeddySeagoon
Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Hunt
Watchman
Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Posts: 5287
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 6:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| NeddySeagoon wrote: | Mike Hunt,
eclean-pkg -d defeats the purpose as you want the old versions that this command removes.
I'm not sure how big packages grows, I'll look when I power up my old box next. It has about five years worth of packages that have never been cleaned. |
Can't argue with that. They could come in handy if the networking was lost, or a needed version is no longer available for some reason.
I suppose it could eventually grow into double-digit GBs. Eg. on a dist-cleaned partion: | Code: | Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/mapper/vg-distfiles 4.0G 2.2G 1.7G 57% /usr/portage/distfiles |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shining Arcanine
Veteran
Joined: 24 Sep 2009
Posts: 1110
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 7:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Those are the sources for the files installed on your system. The packages are under /usr/portage/packages/
As long as we are comparing, my distfiles directory is between 2.7 to 2.8GB:
| Code: | new-host-2 linux # du -s /usr/portage/distfiles/
2830268 /usr/portage/distfiles/ |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Gentoo Chat
