Hi,
On Thursday 08 September 2011 11:53:28 Stefan Schaeckeler wrote:
> Hi all, please don't take this posting too serious. I was just curious ...
your are talking about a serious problem.
>
> Using source based ports is with almost 5 US cents 6.19 times (case 1 vs case
> 2a) or 1.73 times (case 1 vs case 2b) more expensive than using binary
> packages :)
Yes, but:
You are moving the cost from you to the the hosting companies. If more people
use packages, they will need more capacity to supply all the different variants.
Does anybody know what takes more capacity? The sources or the binaries? I
would believe that the sources would take more space and bandwidth but the
different variants of the binaries could be much bigger at the end.
I remember some articles about the electricity bill Google gets every month. It
is not that low.
So, to paint a more complete picture, we must see both sides of the fence.
To make matters worse, people like me do both. I upgrade via the packages and
then compile while I am already able to work with the new ports. At least, if
the packages worked.
At the end, we who want to go green have to stop using the Internet and go back
to postal services as it costs less energy.
Erich
>
>
> - Stefan
>
>
>
> Details:
>
> Price: 1 kw*h = 10 US cent.
>
> Kill-a-Watt trick: by setting the price per kw to $9.999 (= $10), I could get
> one more digit of accuracy for the consumed energy by dividing the price by
> 10.
>
> HW: Sony vaio pcg-k23 laptop (pentium 4, 2,8 GHz, huge display). Booted into
> FreeBSD, it consumes around 40 Watt ("idle"). When compiling programs, the
> power consumption doubles to somewhat above 80 Watt. Internet connection
> 768kb/s.
>
> SW: Installed 259 ports via this script:
> --- snip ---
> date
> for i in /usr/ports/x11/xorg-minimal\
> /usr/ports/x11/xorg-apps\
> /usr/ports/x11/xorg-cf-files\
> /usr/ports/x11/xorg-docs\
> /usr/ports/x11/xorg-libraries\
> /usr/ports/shells/bash3\
> /usr/ports/print/teTeX\
> /usr/ports/editors/emacs\
> /usr/ports/editors/joe2\
> /usr/ports/multimedia/xmms\
> /usr/ports/multimedia/ffmpeg\
> /usr/ports/lang/clisp\
> /usr/ports/lang/hugs\
> /usr/ports/lang/swi-pl\
> /usr/ports/lang/llvm-gcc4\
> /usr/ports/lang/gnat\
> /usr/ports/lang/Gofer\
> /usr/ports/x11-toolkits/tk86
> do
> cd $i && yes o | make install clean
> done
> date
> halt -p
> --- snip ---
>
> Similarly, 246 binary packages have been installed via pkg_add -r.
>
> pkg_delete /var/db/pkg/*
> rm -rf /usr/ports/distfiles/
>
> PACKAGESITE=ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8-stable/Latest/
> export PACKAGESITE
>
> --- snip ---
> date
> for i in xorg-minimal\
> xorg-apps\
> xorg-cf-files\
> xorg-docs\
> xorg-libraries\
> bash3\
> teTeX\
> emacs\
> joe2\
> xmms\
> ffmpeg\
> clisp\
> hugs\
> swi-pl\
> llvm-gcc4\
> gnat\
> Gofer\
> tk86
> do
> pkg_add -r $i
> done
> date
> halt -p
> --- snip ---
>
>
> The number of ports and binary packages varies slightly. I don't know why.
> This only introduces a small error.
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
>
>
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
