On Friday, 7 December 2018 15:01:09 GMT Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 5:48 AM Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > On Friday, 7 December 2018 10:17:17 GMT Andreas Fink wrote:
> > > On Fri, 07 Dec 2018 10:14:45 +
> > >
> > > Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > > > And today, of course, there's an u
On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 5:48 AM Peter Humphrey wrote:
>
> On Friday, 7 December 2018 10:17:17 GMT Andreas Fink wrote:
> > On Fri, 07 Dec 2018 10:14:45 +
> >
> > Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > > And today, of course, there's an upgrade. That's another reason I
> > > ditched it. Is there a way to for
On Friday, 7 December 2018 10:17:17 GMT Andreas Fink wrote:
> On Fri, 07 Dec 2018 10:14:45 +
>
> Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > And today, of course, there's an upgrade. That's another reason I
> > ditched it. Is there a way to force chromium to be not ~amd64 on a
> > ~amd64 system?
>
> Yes, I do
On Fri, 07 Dec 2018 10:14:45 +
Peter Humphrey wrote:
> And today, of course, there's an upgrade. That's another reason I
> ditched it. Is there a way to force chromium to be not ~amd64 on a
> ~amd64 system?
Yes, I do that with this entry in /etc/portage/package.keywords:
www-client/chromium
On Thursday, 6 December 2018 10:35:19 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Wednesday, 5 December 2018 11:11:06 GMT Mick wrote:
> > On Wednesday, 5 December 2018 10:12:10 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > > The main reason I've ditched chrome and chromium altogether is that they
> > > insist on redirecting me
On Wednesday, 5 December 2018 11:11:06 GMT Mick wrote:
> On Wednesday, 5 December 2018 10:12:10 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > The main reason I've ditched chrome and chromium altogether is that they
> > insist on redirecting me to their mobile site - and this is a 27-inch
> > screen! But I'm also u
On Wednesday, 5 December 2018 10:12:10 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote:
> The main reason I've ditched chrome and chromium altogether is that they
> insist on redirecting me to their mobile site - and this is a 27-inch
> screen! But I'm also uncomfortable with the privacy concerns such as you
> mention.
>
On Wednesday, 5 December 2018 09:16:10 GMT Mick wrote:
> I chose Chromium because I understood Google-Chrome to have some settings/
> code, which is meant to link Google services with a user's footprint even
> after you have logged out of all Google services.
>
> What I found with Chromium is tha
On Wednesday, 5 December 2018 03:26:50 GMT Jack wrote:
> On 2018.12.04 20:36, Adam Carter wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 7:41 AM Mick wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, 4 December 2018 19:23:27 GMT Jack wrote:
> > > Phew! The chromium emerge completed with -j1, although it took 4
> >
> > hours
> >
> >
On 2018.12.04 20:36, Adam Carter wrote:
On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 7:41 AM Mick wrote:
> On Tuesday, 4 December 2018 19:23:27 GMT Jack wrote:
> Phew! The chromium emerge completed with -j1, although it took 4
hours
> longer
> than last time on one PC and 6.5 hours longer on another.
>
For thos
On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 7:41 AM Mick wrote:
> On Tuesday, 4 December 2018 19:23:27 GMT Jack wrote:
> Phew! The chromium emerge completed with -j1, although it took 4 hours
> longer
> than last time on one PC and 6.5 hours longer on another.
>
For those systems it might be worth trying the binary
On Tue, 04 Dec 2018 21:10:05 +, Mick wrote:
> > It starts the compile by running make or whatever is appropriate for
> > the build, so it doesn't need to build anything already built any
> > more than a bare make does. But using ebuild compile means you get
> > the same environment as when you
On Tuesday, 4 December 2018 20:57:11 GMT Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Dec 2018 14:23:27 -0500, Jack wrote:
> > On 2018.12.04 14:13, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> > >> One thing I've done in the past if something failed after a long
> > >> time compiling is to cd to the top build dir (under the Portag
On Tue, 04 Dec 2018 14:23:27 -0500, Jack wrote:
> On 2018.12.04 14:13, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> >> One thing I've done in the past if something failed after a long
> >> time compiling is to cd to the top build dir (under the Portage tmp
> >> dir) and just continue the compile (either make or ni
On Tuesday, 4 December 2018 19:23:27 GMT Jack wrote:
> On 2018.12.04 14:13, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> > On Tue, 04 Dec 2018 13:42:16 -0500, Jack wrote:
> >>> Given I've spent more than two days compiling to get nowhere with
> >>
> >>> this, I'm thinking:
> >> One thing I've done in the past if someth
On 2018.12.04 14:13, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Tue, 04 Dec 2018 13:42:16 -0500, Jack wrote:
Given I've spent more than two days compiling to get nowhere with
this, I'm thinking:
One thing I've done in the past if something failed after a long
time compiling is to cd to the top build dir (under
On Tue, 04 Dec 2018 13:42:16 -0500, Jack wrote:
> > Given I've spent more than two days compiling to get nowhere with
> > this, I'm
> > thinking:
> One thing I've done in the past if something failed after a long time
> compiling is to cd to the top build dir (under the Portage tmp dir)
> an
On 2018.12.04 02:35, Mick wrote:
Two Intel systems with 4G RAM failed to build chromium, even after
setting
MAKEOPTS="-j2". The ebuild is checking for a minimum of 3G RAM:
>>> Running pre-merge checks for www-client/chromium-70.0.3538.110
* Checking for at least 3 GiB RAM ...
On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 10:47 AM Mick wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, 4 December 2018 08:06:22 GMT Alexander Kapshuk wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 9:35 AM Mick wrote:
> > > Two Intel systems with 4G RAM failed to build chromium, even after setting
> > >
> > > MAKEOPTS="-j2". The ebuild is checking for
> Thanks for this. It may be I'll need to build chromium as a binary on the
> faster PC from now on and copy it over to the older clients, but I can't
> recall what command spews out the detailed CFLAGS for the client which I will
> need to run on the faster host's CLI to emerge the binary. Grate
On Tuesday, 4 December 2018 08:06:22 GMT Alexander Kapshuk wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 9:35 AM Mick wrote:
> > Two Intel systems with 4G RAM failed to build chromium, even after setting
> >
> > MAKEOPTS="-j2". The ebuild is checking for a minimum of 3G RAM:
> > >>> Running pre-merge checks fo
On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 9:35 AM Mick wrote:
>
> Two Intel systems with 4G RAM failed to build chromium, even after setting
> MAKEOPTS="-j2". The ebuild is checking for a minimum of 3G RAM:
>
> >>> Running pre-merge checks for www-client/chromium-70.0.3538.110
> * Checking for at least 3 GiB RAM ..
Two Intel systems with 4G RAM failed to build chromium, even after setting
MAKEOPTS="-j2". The ebuild is checking for a minimum of 3G RAM:
>>> Running pre-merge checks for www-client/chromium-70.0.3538.110
* Checking for at least 3 GiB RAM ...[ ok ]
* Checking fo
23 matches
Mail list logo
