On Thu, 2011-07-28 at 11:54 -0500, Dale wrote: > Tanstaafl wrote: > > On 2011-07-28 12:00 PM, Mick<michaelkintz...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> On Thursday 28 Jul 2011 16:45:54 Paul Hartman wrote: > >> > >>> On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Mick<michaelkintz...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> All sounds good, except that libreoffice requires acres of space to > >>>> emerge and on at least two machines I'll have to move to binary. > >>>> > > > >>> Is it much worse than OpenOffice? Build times are nearly identical on > >>> my system but I haven't paid attention to temp space needed during the > >>> emerge process. > >>> > > > >> By about +3G may be more! > >> > > I think this is not so with the new 3.4.x versions... > > > > > > > > This is so far. > > root@fireball / # du -shc /var/tmp/portage/app-office/ > 2.6G /var/tmp/portage/app-office/ > 2.6G total > root@fireball / > > It's not done yet either. My /var is at 94% so I am moving some > http-rep* stuff out of the way. One of these days, I'm just going to > mount it on tmpfs and let it rip. lol > > Dale > > :-) :-) >
For systems without enough space I just map some more with nfs (before you start obviously) - yes it is a lot slower, and you need a reliable network with nfs over tcp for best reliability but it works fine. BillK
