From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-user+bounces-148793-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6B561381F3
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 09:57:59 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 25CDAE09B7;
Sun, 21 Jul 2013 09:57:51 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-we0-f170.google.com (mail-we0-f170.google.com [74.125.82.170])
(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EAB78E0954
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 09:57:49 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-we0-f170.google.com with SMTP id w57so5162153wes.29
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 02:57:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=from:reply-to:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to
:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:message-id;
bh=FAp1+ZZQsbNFSNfJkjuIfFwGLjf/oR9Er7LszvXfZjg=;
b=zGNojC+mCppnujMCYuEPT3SeaBYhL0S62FaMo1j4rt4uN3egQBIbWwYNhg2JfXHU2o
y21nlKKDPXWbWldlXlG0coqIFbR3PDpIABUUaElloapcpJDMY+gFwscvdbE6SF1MVHbp
mYhBRhUw0mNELkeZdZhvWCkLzmyYhPJlEl1jSulc2aQeUvnmpi5Oa70gWsGjEphyjshx
5nBY8BoE3CSnvE1syr+o0mOFiz7MgmsVpXZf59f+qEtpEE6qbq7JSjj8Lozqmu5qrMNR
Y/acAkjrU5ZMy9Tbcbwgnz6fij1vuL8CHLiqwGzPUl0sGWGEh7k90dttQzPTIqsf5UfQ
SZ6g==
X-Received: by 10.194.2.13 with SMTP id 13mr16604162wjq.74.1374400668598;
Sun, 21 Jul 2013 02:57:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dell_xps.localnet (230.3.169.217.in-addr.arpa. [217.169.3.230])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id w4sm33488474wia.9.2013.07.21.02.57.47
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
(version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
Sun, 21 Jul 2013 02:57:47 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mick <michaelkintzios@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] SSD partitioning and migration
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2013 10:57:24 +0100
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.8.13-gentoo; KDE/4.10.4; x86_64; ; )
References: <51E8E30E.20906@gmail.com> <201307210813.32682.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> <51EBAC7B.6060409@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <51EBAC7B.6060409@gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed;
boundary="nextPart3185915.yh9bG84KHq";
protocol="application/pgp-signature";
micalg=pgp-sha1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201307211057.34981.michaelkintzios@gmail.com>
X-Archives-Salt: 22d8004d-a58e-45ea-880e-cf29f4e3df92
X-Archives-Hash: ed257bbac7da99cc50d00525d817a5cd
--nextPart3185915.yh9bG84KHq
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sunday 21 Jul 2013 10:40:11 Dale wrote:
> Mick wrote:
> > On Saturday 20 Jul 2013 06:12:40 Dale wrote:
> >> Bruce Hill wrote:
> >>> If 16GB of RAM wasn't enough, ydiw. I've used that line of 7G forever,
> >>> and run app-office/libreoffice, as well as firefox and some other big
> >>> app (forget it's name) and _never_ had a problem.
> >>=20
> >> Well, a while back, OOo and LOo wanted more than 8Gbs. It wasn't my
> >> need but what portage looked for. Then someone did some changes and
> >> reduced that need and it worked. From my understanding, there was some
> >> code clean up that helped in that. I think it looks for 6Gbs now. Fr=
om
> >> the ebuild:
> >>=20
> >> CHECKREQS_MEMORY=3D"512M"
> >> CHECKREQS_DISK_BUILD=3D"6G"
> >>=20
> >> It used to be more than that. If it didn't have enough, it stopped.
> >> Even when I would override that setting, it would still run out of spa=
ce
> >> more often than not. As a matter of fact, I still have the command in
> >> my freq used commands file that I used to fix it:
> >>=20
> >> mount -t tmpfs -o size=3D12g tmpfs /var/tmp/portage
> >=20
> > Does it stop dead or does it start to page into swap?
>=20
> Actually, portage looks for enough space before even starting and still
> does. However, when I force it to ignore it, it stops and says it ran
> out of space. I'd just rather it didn't use swap anyway. Either way,
> OOo and LOo used to need lots of space. I think there was some code
> cleanup and maybe some other changes that reduced that a lot. I think
> there was also some gcc changes to but not sure on that.
>=20
> I did some more searching after my last post, at one point it looked for
> at least 12GBs from what I found. That was the largest setting I found.
Right, so running /var/tmp/portage on a tmpfs definitely won't work on an o=
ld=20
box of mine with only a few MB of memory.
=2D-=20
Regards,
Mick
--nextPart3185915.yh9bG84KHq
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux)
iQEcBAABAgAGBQJR67COAAoJELAdA+zwE4Ye8OsIAJeaneirx3rAGocuKmgj1Mt+
BY/VfCchOFct+oezrv/ay+DymW9ssSZ7shkrKIVMl/0Y+ABIz5FIP9hMxjv3/af9
O5O1Vn6cHxy2AMFGU8FEXvPZFaMPppNEwmH82lAY+n31RcEwahYwD0Rbs6bdoQEL
P4FrkF1fBACbxVpN7cNHdqx6CImcYfeRkP45EGspMPAmNjsYIYrZMOC2UuKk8WuC
nYdTtx6yQVs6nqRcXBgJRZg2iB/eltEoeVvoLEg+WtLmQASgKYUfaxsl/pz37Fze
gSzXxc8TJ8m+OjyDreDiqj2C6udnUO+jBv25AmCM39gaOZtnNG5aP3B0n0OrFPQ=
=nfa6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--nextPart3185915.yh9bG84KHq--