I never used tmpfs for portage TMPDIR before and now decided to give it a try.
I have 8GB of RAM and 12GB of swap on a separate partition.
Do I correctly understood https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Portage_TMPDIR_on_tmpfs
that I can safely set in the fstab the size of my tmpfs to 12GB so
that the chr
On 08/02/18 19:11, gevisz wrote:
I never used tmpfs for portage TMPDIR before and now decided to give it a try.
I have 8GB of RAM and 12GB of swap on a separate partition.
Do I correctly understood https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Portage_TMPDIR_on_tmpfs
that I can safely set in the fstab the size
On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 12:47 PM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> On 08/02/18 19:11, gevisz wrote:
>>
>> I never used tmpfs for portage TMPDIR before and now decided to give it a
>> try.
>>
>> I have 8GB of RAM and 12GB of swap on a separate partition.
>>
You can try it, but for Chromium these days you
On 08/02/18 20:13, Rich Freeman wrote:
If you're not using ccache, then you don't need /var/tmp to be on tmpfs. You
should only put /var/tmp/portage on tmpfs.
I disagree on this. Unless you have something that uses gobs of space
on /var/tmp there is little reason not to make the whole thing a
gevisz wrote:
> I never used tmpfs for portage TMPDIR before and now decided to give it a try.
>
> I have 8GB of RAM and 12GB of swap on a separate partition.
>
> Do I correctly understood https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Portage_TMPDIR_on_tmpfs
> that I can safely set in the fstab the size of my tmpfs
On 08/02/18 21:17, Dale wrote:
I have 16GBs of memory here and have /var/tmp/portage/ on tmpfs, no
ccache. With the growing size of packages, I've had to put several on
regular spinning rust to make sure enough space is available. This is
my list, so far.
www-client/firefox
www-client/seamonke
On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 2:05 PM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> On 08/02/18 20:13, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>>
>>> If you're not using ccache, then you don't need /var/tmp to be on tmpfs.
>>> You
>>> should only put /var/tmp/portage on tmpfs.
>>
>>
>> I disagree on this. Unless you have something that use
On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 2:17 PM, Dale wrote:
> As someone else pointed out, if you
> start using swap, that generally defeats the purpose of tmpfs.
>
I'll just add one thing to this, which I've probably already said ages ago:
In an ideal world swap would STILL be better than building on disk,
bec
On 02/08/2018 10:11 AM, gevisz wrote:
And I am going to set the whole /var/tmp on tpmfs instead of just
/var/tmp/portage
Is it ok?
I don't know about the context of emerging, but I do know about the
context of /var/tmp being volatile.
More specifically, /var/tmp is traditionally supposed t
2018-02-08 19:47 GMT+02:00 Nikos Chantziaras :
> On 08/02/18 19:11, gevisz wrote:
>>
>> I never used tmpfs for portage TMPDIR before and now decided
>> to give it a try.
>>
>> I have 8GB of RAM and 12GB of swap on a separate partition.
>>
>> Do I correctly understood
>> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki
2018-02-08 20:13 GMT+02:00 Rich Freeman :
> On 08/02/18 19:11, gevisz wrote:
>>
>> I never used tmpfs for portage TMPDIR before and now decided to give it a
>> try.
>>
>> I have 8GB of RAM and 12GB of swap on a separate partition.
>>
>> Do I correctly understood
>> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Port
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 chr
2018-02-08 21:17 GMT+02:00 Dale :
> gevisz wrote:
>> I never used tmpfs for portage TMPDIR before and now decided to give it a
>> try.
>>
>> I have 8GB of RAM and 12GB of swap on a separate partition.
>>
>> Do I correctly understood
>> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Portage_TMPDIR_on_tmpfs
>> that
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
On 08/02/18 23:31, gevisz wrote:
I do not use ccache, and in my /var/tmp I only have /var/tmp/portage
and /var/tmp/genkernel (I use genkernel to generate initramfs image).
I never use emerge and genkernel at the same time. So, why not to put
the whole /var/tmp into one tmpfs?
Well, someone her
2018-02-09 0:19 GMT+02:00 Nikos Chantziaras :
> On 08/02/18 23:31, gevisz wrote:
>>
>> I do not use ccache, and in my /var/tmp I only have /var/tmp/portage
>> and /var/tmp/genkernel (I use genkernel to generate initramfs image).
>>
>> I never use emerge and genkernel at the same time. So, why not t
On 08/02/18 23:57, Rich Freeman wrote:
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 com
On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 5:32 PM, gevisz wrote:
> 2018-02-09 0:19 GMT+02:00 Nikos Chantziaras :
>> On 08/02/18 23:31, gevisz wrote:
>>>
>>> I do not use ccache, and in my /var/tmp I only have /var/tmp/portage
>>> and /var/tmp/genkernel (I use genkernel to generate initramfs image).
>>>
>>> I never u
From: freemanr...@gmail.com on behalf of Rich Freeman
Sent: Thursday, February 8, 2018 5:38 PM
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs
On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 5:32 PM, gevisz wrote:
>> 2018-02-09 0:19 GMT+02:00 Nikos Ch
On 08/02/18 20:56, Grant Taylor wrote:
On 02/08/2018 10:11 AM, gevisz wrote:
And I am going to set the whole /var/tmp on tpmfs instead of just
/var/tmp/portage
Is it ok?
I don't know about the context of emerging, but I do know about the
context of /var/tmp being volatile.
More specifical
On 02/08/2018 04:18 PM, Wol's lists wrote:
EMPHATICALLY YES.
;-)
/tmp is defined as being volatile - stuff can disappear at any time.
I don't know that I've ever had things in /tmp disappear "at any time"
as in randomly and without external influence. Usually it's a reboot or
nightly mai
On 02/08/2018 03:32 PM, gevisz wrote:
In this case it would be nice to hear a reason.
I think the reason probably goes back a number of years. When /tmp was
made volatile (ram / swap backed) there was a need for non-volatile temp
space. Thus, /var/tmp was created as non-volatile specificall
On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 6:18 PM, Wol's lists wrote:
>
> /var/tmp is defined as the place where programs store stuff like crash
> recovery files. Mounting it tmpfs is going to screw up any programs that
> reply on that *defined* behaviour to recover after a crash.
>
Care to cite an example of such
On 09/02/18 00:02, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 6:18 PM, Wol's lists wrote:
/var/tmp is defined as the place where programs store stuff like crash
recovery files. Mounting it tmpfs is going to screw up any programs that
reply on that*defined* behaviour to recover after a crash.
Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 2:17 PM, Dale wrote:
>> As someone else pointed out, if you
>> start using swap, that generally defeats the purpose of tmpfs.
>>
> I'll just add one thing to this, which I've probably already said ages ago:
>
> In an ideal world swap would STILL be bett
Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> On 08/02/18 21:17, Dale wrote:
>> I have 16GBs of memory here and have /var/tmp/portage/ on tmpfs, no
>> ccache. With the growing size of packages, I've had to put several on
>> regular spinning rust to make sure enough space is available. This is
>> my list, so far.
>>
gevisz wrote:
> 2018-02-08 21:17 GMT+02:00 Dale :
>> gevisz wrote:
>>> I never used tmpfs for portage TMPDIR before and now decided to give it a
>>> try.
>>>
>>> I have 8GB of RAM and 12GB of swap on a separate partition.
>>>
>>> Do I correctly understood
>>> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Portage_
gevisz wrote:
>
> 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 to
On 2018-02-09 01:15, Wol's lists wrote:
> > Care to cite an example of such a program in the Gentoo repo? I
> > certainly can't think of any, and I've been running with /var/tmp on
> > tmpfs for over a decade.
>
> I don't know of any.
vim?
Although that choice was recently criticized on the os
Hello,
I still have some systems around that need to run a vanilla kernel 3.2.
This works without any issues as long as I am using gcc-4.9.4 or gcc-5.4 to
compile the kernel. Using gcc-6.4 for compilation was not possible
out-of-the-box as it is defaulting to --enable-default-pie.
After reading ht
30 matches
Mail list logo
