On 12/31/2016 06:59 AM, Håkon Alstadheim wrote:
>
>
> Den 30. des. 2016 14:44, skrev lee:
>> Nikos Chantziaras <rea...@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> A world update emerged gcc-5.4.0-r2 (update from 5.4.0). At the end of
>>> the build, I got this:
>>>
>>> * Python seems to be broken, attempting to locate CHOST ourselves ...
>>> * Switching native-compiler to x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-5.4.0
>>> ...PORTAGE_BZIP2_COMMAND setting is invalid: 'bzip2'
>>> PORTAGE_BZIP2_COMMAND setting from make.globals is invalid: 'bzip2'
>>>
>>> I'm not seeing how python is broken here (works fine), and why
>>> PORTAGE_BZIP2_COMMAND is invalid. Can someone explain what's going on
>>> here?
>>
>> Since there is such a command, is it possible (and worthwhile) to use
>> lbzip2 instead of bzip2 with portage? (lbzip2 is ridiculously fast when
>> you have the cores and the RAM ...)
>>
>>
>
> What is the difference between theese two? :
> ----
> * app-arch/lbzip2
> Available versions: 2.3-r1 ~2.5 {debug symlink}
> Homepage: https://github.com/kjn/lbzip2/
> Description: Parallel bzip2 utility
>
> [I] app-arch/pbzip2
> Available versions: 1.1.12 ~1.1.12-r1 ~1.1.13 {static symlink}
> Installed versions: 1.1.12(kl. 16.51 +0100 09. nov. 2016)(symlink
> -static)
> Homepage: http://compression.ca/pbzip2/
> https://launchpad.net/pbzip2
> Description: Parallel bzip2 (de)compressor using libbz2
>
> ----
> I just picked one at random.
>
lbzip2 is generally faster when I looked into it, but it likes gobs of RAM.
Dan
