| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
EAD
Guru
Joined: 05 Jul 2006
Posts: 352
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Philantrop
Retired Dev
Joined: 21 Dec 2004
Posts: 1129
Location: Germany
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EAD
Guru
Joined: 05 Jul 2006
Posts: 352
|
 Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2006 6:30 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Hi
Is it really speed things up?
like it said in the wiki, making KDE compile in 5 minutes? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Philantrop
Retired Dev
Joined: 21 Dec 2004
Posts: 1129
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2006 6:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, it really does speed things up significantly. I don't see anything about compiling KDE in 5 minutes in the tmpfs wiki entry (and it won't be that fast) but it's useful.
_________________
If you feel the issues discussed in this thread have been resolved, please add a "[Solved]" to the subject of your original posting. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EAD
Guru
Joined: 05 Jul 2006
Posts: 352
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2006 6:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Philantrop wrote: | Yes, it really does speed things up significantly. I don't see anything about compiling KDE in 5 minutes in the tmpfs wiki entry (and
it won't be that fast) but it's useful. |
Ok, Tanx 
Is there any thing else I should try to really speed up things in Portage? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Philantrop
Retired Dev
Joined: 21 Dec 2004
Posts: 1129
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2006 6:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well, "emerge -s" to search is truly slow as you probably found out already. Therefor, I suggest using app-portage/eix for all search purposes. It's fast, reliable and powerful.
Apart from that, I don't think there's much you can do.
_________________
If you feel the issues discussed in this thread have been resolved, please add a "[Solved]" to the subject of your original posting. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EAD
Guru
Joined: 05 Jul 2006
Posts: 352
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2006 7:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Philantrop wrote: | Well, "emerge -s" to search is truly slow as you probably found out already. Therefor, I suggest using app-portage/eix for all search purposes. It's fast, reliable and powerful.
Apart from that, I don't think there's much you can do. |
Yeah I saw the search is slow, and using DBM and all this can speed things up.
What about making it compiling faster? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Philantrop
Retired Dev
Joined: 21 Dec 2004
Posts: 1129
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2006 7:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Faster hardware. :-)
There's simply not much you can do.
_________________
If you feel the issues discussed in this thread have been resolved, please add a "[Solved]" to the subject of your original posting. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EAD
Guru
Joined: 05 Jul 2006
Posts: 352
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2006 7:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Philantrop wrote: | Faster hardware.
There's simply not much you can do. |
Haa 
Ok, but if someone find something like tempfs or something let me know, beside when do you think a computer hardware will be fast enough for compiling things like KDE or GCC in just a few minutes? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Philantrop
Retired Dev
Joined: 21 Dec 2004
Posts: 1129
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2006 8:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
On a single computer? Well, wait a few years and today's version of KDE will probably compile in minutes. :)
Seriously, this won't happen any time soon.
You could use a cluster or distributed compiling using distcc but kdelibs alone needs about about 20 fast (>= 1 GHz) P3-class computers to compile in about six minutes.
But you should be able to work normally while compiling in the background. Or you could compile during the night only or while you work.
_________________
If you feel the issues discussed in this thread have been resolved, please add a "[Solved]" to the subject of your original posting. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mark_alec
Bodhisattva
Joined: 11 Sep 2004
Posts: 6066
Location: Melbourne, Australia
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2006 8:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Moved from Installing Gentoo to Portage & Programming. Not installation related. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EAD
Guru
Joined: 05 Jul 2006
Posts: 352
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2006 9:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Philantrop wrote: | On a single computer? Well, wait a few years and today's version of KDE will probably compile in minutes.
Seriously, this won't happen any time soon.
You could use a cluster or distributed compiling using distcc but kdelibs alone needs about about 20 fast (>= 1 GHz) P3-class computers to compile in about six minutes.
But you should be able to work normally while compiling in the background. Or you could compile during the night only or while you work. |
woo 
Lots of time.
But if I have let say a quad core CPU ( will be in 2007-2008) and at least 4 giga RAM and RAID 0 and so on, Won't I compile it in lets say few minutes?
With all the tricks like tempfs and so on? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Philantrop
Retired Dev
Joined: 21 Dec 2004
Posts: 1129
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2006 9:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Maybe, EAD, I can't really say. Let me get my cup and read tea leaves. :-)
Or if you like it movie-wise, let me quote from Alfred Hitchcock's famous "The Man Who Knew Too Much":
| Quote: | Que Sera, Sera,
Whatever will be, will be
The future's not ours, to see
Que Sera, Sera
What will be, will be.
|
Or maybe literature-wise? Read Thomas More, "Utopia"
More? ;) Maybe hardware-wise? Thomas leads inevitably to Gordon - Gordon Moore, creator of Moore's Law which might be interesting to answer your question, too.
We both might not be much further now experience-wise and knowledge-wise but at least you'll know more, all-around-wise, if you rent and watch The Apartment. ;-)
_________________
If you feel the issues discussed in this thread have been resolved, please add a "[Solved]" to the subject of your original posting. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ferdinando
Veteran
Joined: 25 Nov 2003
Posts: 1027
Location: Gaeta (LT) - Italy
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2006 10:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
No, really, the answer is 42.
_________________
La risposta, non la devi cercare fuori, la devi cercare dentro di te: e però è SBAGLIATA!
-- Corrado Guzzanti, "Pippo Chennedy Show", 1997 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tabanus
Guru
Joined: 11 Jun 2004
Posts: 549
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 9:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Why can't I just symlink /var/tmp/portage to /dev/shm, which according to the comments in /etc/fstab:
| Quote: | glibc 2.2 and above expects tmpfs to be mounted at /dev/shm for
# POSIX shared memory (shm_open, shm_unlink).
# (tmpfs is a dynamically expandable/shrinkable ramdisk, and will
# use almost no memory if not populated with files) |
So if every Gentoo system already has a dynamically expandable/shrinkable ramdisk, why not use it? If you've got a big emerge that's likely to take more RAM than you've got, it's an easy job to move it.
I've not actually done this, but I would like to know if it's possible
_________________
Never underestimate a hamster. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Genone
Retired Dev
Joined: 14 Mar 2003
Posts: 8690
Location: beyond the rim
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 12:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Do not ever symlink /var/tmp/portage to somewhere else. Using symlinks to change portage locations is generally a bad idea (as it for example can break sandbox). EIther change the relevant path variables in make.conf or use mount --bind (or plain mount).
As for directly using /dev/shm, you can try it but I would reserve it for glibcs internal use. You're not wasting memory by having multiple tmpfs mounts, so I don't see any drawback by just making /var/tmp/portage another tmpfs mountpoint compared to using /dev/shm directly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tabanus
Guru
Joined: 11 Jun 2004
Posts: 549
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 7:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oh. OK then...I guess I'll do it the proper way. Thanks
_________________
Never underestimate a hamster. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Portage & Programming
because the warning sounds really nasty. I'm using tmpfs, though, and I like it as it really speeds things up. You could try it using this: