|
|
Back to UserFriendly Strip Comments Index
|
Attn: Laptop Ufies | by yazdi | 2007-10-22 05:27:42 |
|
More RAM is almost always better. | by Qcumber-some | 2007-10-22 05:41:00 |
|
Even if you don't use the RAM right away, | by roger G. rapid | 2007-10-22 05:56:04 |
|
I'm running both WinXP and Linux with Ramdisk | by Qcumber-some | 2007-10-22 06:10:44 |
|
ooOoo, neat. | by Freakazoid | 2007-10-22 10:33:42 |
|
Compiling is disk-space intensive | by PeKaJe | 2007-10-22 14:32:56 |
| Right, right, and nevertheless :-) |
by Qcumber-some |
2007-10-22 14:57:03 |
Compiling is disk space intensive. But with 2GB RAM you can easily spend 1GB for /var/tmp/portage which is enough for most of the packages. Even for Thunderbird and Firefox. IIRC only one package was not satisfied with that, and that's OpenOffice (2.2 needs about 5GB, 2.3 about 6GB), but I've set CHECKREQS_ACTION="error" and so it just bails out if it checks the free space (openoffice ebuild does).
And the result of the compiling on my Laptop (which means slow harddisk) is sufficiently better than from disk. File cache for source files and compile results is not really effective since they are usually only used twice each. The compiler and make itself will stay in cache anyway.
With 768MB it *may* be a bit difficult to find sufficient results with a tmpfs at /var/tmp/portage. I'd first try with the default 384MB, but you should expect some of the bigger packages which don't check for memory (qt, tk, xorg stuff) to fail because of insufficient disk space. |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
It all depends on the amount of RAM, of course | by PeKaJe | 2007-10-22 15:47:18 |
|
|
[Todays Cartoon Discussion]
[News Index]
|
|
