On Wednesday 31 January 2007 14:22, Uwe Thiem wrote: > On 31 January 2007 13:02, Alan McKinnon wrote: > > On Tuesday 30 January 2007 16:06, Uwe Thiem wrote: > > > What are the specs of your box? > > > > Dell Latitude D810 > > 2GHz Centrino > > 2GB Ram > > 80G SATA > > 2.6.19-suspend2-r1 > > Odd. My 2.8GHz Pentium 4 takes *far* longer to compile OO, something > close to 10h, though I haven't really timed it.
Intuition tells me that on my machine emerging OOo must do a lot of stuff my machine is fast at, and relatively little that it's slow at. I know for a fact it's got a nippy cpu and lots of ram, but disk IO is much slower than it ought to be. Also, my times come from genlop, and I may well have moved between home and office networks, and I can't guarantee that both networks have ntp servers exactly synced > > But, OOo is a well known resource hog that really stresses a > > machine when compiling, so I don't think it makes a useful measure > > of anything. And KDE-meta isn't much better these days either. > > Yesterdays sync brought in 3.5.6 and 3 or 4 other bits and pieces, > > which I started at 1am this morning. It's just finished now at 1pm > > - 12 hours! > > KDE is in so far better as it doesn't forbit parallel compiling - as > OO does. So I can use distcc and let all my boxes contribute. That > brings the compile time of KDE down a lot. Unfortunately, that isn't > possible with OO. kde-meta also runs ./configure something like 300 times :-) which is very disk intensive and my machine sucks at that alan -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
