From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D24AB1382C5 for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2018 22:17:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0A97BE0ABE; Thu, 8 Feb 2018 22:16:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-it0-x22c.google.com (mail-it0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9A393E093D for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2018 22:16:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-it0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id e1so8323052ita.0 for ; Thu, 08 Feb 2018 14:16:54 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=2BaWOlBAkhfMfEcwBkF6Yamlem66mm8SGeYlqXJ7WOA=; b=QRlmpHGZKYYKvJF+X2uurFzWwYVKs9ARJaQpN5E0fbovCb2u1OtUOHh5wCNZMnkRXu EDDT5+9PksWsZgImaP01/1YUsXN1saaE2D3Kg9TY9yvbSVfrdR/vD1vWknC/OdXKmYqI 4ZTqxl4EzN3NNJcnF4/cvegt+4XBuzUA7pSvdXTQmOh0SYR+aSpBfI6PonkYHuyfNNo2 bFuxFMI6l9gQWFo9k1QgLAwjyB6+73td4w/ntehwjvNGgM9nfYi5BNbEEdh0bYFrhc7A Nj0BVioUGNRjzdsWI4gjVRMpj44S7I5lRx3WlKEdhJ2c6e66mNWxrgW0i+f56uac+GSC bofQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=2BaWOlBAkhfMfEcwBkF6Yamlem66mm8SGeYlqXJ7WOA=; b=cMTBIhlQa8Wths8oVHkVvunRQ1XELhdg0FMd2TDiOQsioyYef5ZSLWsEc8JSQzlobJ s2p/xOoL+wgD3kYy1CI03yNiZWGX0i0s5/vpr2o/eYa70e0+GdlTwqQpGGCQEcg7DtTy Pi8n+9UJ6hboDrGbYYRB+wBvurcacFlfI8wuHB3X7LNhCh5Bs3+KjdeWGpe0o7lDUe1A h0Xcu4i6c6aFG83+HfnTCvtibsTaWLOBxpFEEarbsPcOmc4Hiq65P8XZXYzymXTfLuvr 0/RRc9npCOoaTQd606qHsrbx3IFLsPlrRGHxM5oCP8XISoW6K/s6LhZB4frt54RrDNsZ +NnQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APf1xPBLsc40JAbh1mz+nUbww8s5jlJ40X2YdIMU8wVuorFcp5rmajyY vE6/YSUBk9O51ZPP5TSr3w5+pgscviDlfvD/euSHqA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x225G+RmeiKV6/6znh8AE8VwNDuYzulI2ohThQ7P5EvV5DtdLpkOyniFMyjKwhNnsv/Cxivh4DWwqnzqDCHFfB2g= X-Received: by 10.36.189.79 with SMTP id x76mr920828ite.83.1518128213928; Thu, 08 Feb 2018 14:16:53 -0800 (PST) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.107.173.227 with HTTP; Thu, 8 Feb 2018 14:16:53 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: gevisz Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2018 00:16:53 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Archives-Salt: ed83687d-1abf-4b92-aead-0b5396715b13 X-Archives-Hash: 853d1126dbef440f163c93df47f87330 2018-02-08 23:57 GMT+02:00 Rich Freeman : > On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 4:52 PM, gevisz wrote: >> >> However, it probably won't be sooner than >> # emerge --update --deep --with-bdeps=y --newuse --backtrack=90 --ask >> world --exclude chromium >> fails because of the "--exclude chromium" part :), as I have already compiled >> the recent vertion of chromium with /var/tmp/portage on the hard disk and >> it took more than 24 hours on my old AMD Athlon X2 with j2 option. :( >> > > Honestly I doubt that tmpfs will make much difference since this is > probably CPU-bound. Thank you for your reply. You probably will be surprised, but the main reason I am trying to use tmpfs for /var/tmp/ is not because I want to make emerging chromium faster (I have no hope about that because read somewhere that it will make compilation only 10 percent faster) but because I have not too much free space on / (sometimes in the past chromium refused to build in the similar conditions) and because of that either have to move /var/tmp to the separate partition anyway or try to use tmpfs + swap and, if it fails, to move to the separate partition only /var/tmp/portage/notmpfs > Using the jumbo-build option probably will help a lot more - but it > will use even more RAM and might make a tmpfs impractical for you. I > bet that jumbo-build on a spinning disk will be faster for you than > not using that option on a tmpfs. But, there is only one way to be > sure.