On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 20:34 -0500, Caleb Cushing wrote:
> On Jan 20, 2008 8:43 AM, Richard Freeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Stefan de Konink wrote:
> > ..very offtopic but how are you all compiling stuff like
> firefox on a
> > ram disk. Or is 8GB of ram very che
080121 Caleb Cushing wrote:
> last time I checked open office only required ~2GB to compile
OO 2.3.1 needed 3,25 GB here, which was less than in the past IIRC.
You're correct that that is far more than any other pkg needs.
--
,,==
On Jan 20, 2008 8:43 AM, Richard Freeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Stefan de Konink wrote:
> > ..very offtopic but how are you all compiling stuff like firefox on a
> > ram disk. Or is 8GB of ram very cheap suddenly?
>
not to mention, last time I checked open office only required ~2GB of space
On Sunday 20 January 2008, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On 08:47 Sun 20 Jan , Richard Freeman wrote:
> > Duncan wrote:
> >> Obscure? It's the directory name (says another with both /tmp and /var/
> >> tmp on tmpfs). How much less obscure can you get than announcing it
> >> every time the path is
On 08:47 Sun 20 Jan , Richard Freeman wrote:
> Duncan wrote:
>> Obscure? It's the directory name (says another with both /tmp and /var/
>> tmp on tmpfs). How much less obscure can you get than announcing it every
>> time the path is referenced or specified? Who could reasonably argue that
On 20-01-2008 08:47:26 -0500, Richard Freeman wrote:
> You and I know what /tmp is for, but we also know that we shouldn't be
> running as root all the time and yet I'm sure there is a note in the
> install handbook about that. 95% of new linux users come from Windows, and
> as such they have a
Duncan wrote:
Obscure? It's the directory name (says another with both /tmp and /var/
tmp on tmpfs). How much less obscure can you get than announcing it
every time the path is referenced or specified? Who could reasonably
argue that tmp doesn't mean tmp?
Anybody who comes from the worl
Stefan de Konink wrote:
..very offtopic but how are you all compiling stuff like firefox on a
ram disk. Or is 8GB of ram very cheap suddenly?
Swap is your friend. The performance hit is the same as what you'd get
compiling on disk if pages need to be swapped out. The performance is
of cour
On Saturday 19 January 2008, Olivier Galibert wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 19, 2008 at 10:18:35PM +, Duncan wrote:
> > Richard Freeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> > > I think that this would probably warrant an elog. Sure, anybody who
> > > knows the "correct" way to admin unix doe
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Alec Warner schreef:
>> But who compiles firefox? :)
Probably everyone that noticed that the segmentation faults coming from
the precompiled versions are annoying?
Stefan
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Us
On 1/19/08, Stefan de Konink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA512
>
> Duncan schreef:
> > Richard Freeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> > excerpted below, on Sat, 19 Jan 2008 07:55:53 -0500:
> >
> > Obscure? It's the directory name (says
On Sat, Jan 19, 2008 at 10:18:35PM +, Duncan wrote:
> Richard Freeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> excerpted below, on Sat, 19 Jan 2008 07:55:53 -0500:
>
> > I think that this would probably warrant an elog. Sure, anybody who
> > knows the "correct" way to admin unix doesn
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Duncan schreef:
> Richard Freeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> excerpted below, on Sat, 19 Jan 2008 07:55:53 -0500:
>
> Obscure? It's the directory name (says another with both /tmp and /var/
> tmp on tmpfs).
...very offtopic bu
13 matches
Mail list logo
