On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 09:45:06 +0900 Jason Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 18 September 2003 09:32, Collins Richey wrote: > > On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 07:22:38 +0900 > > > > Jason Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Thursday 18 September 2003 00:26, Collins Richey wrote: > > > > On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 16:56:09 +0200 > > > > > > > > Vincent Rubiolo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Another last question : how big is a freshly rsync'ed portage tree? > > > > > > > > du -s shows my tree to be 654232 . > > > > > > That's including distfiles. > > > > > > bash-2.05b# du -s portage/ > > > 1647793 portage > > > bash-2.05b# du -s portage/distfiles/ > > > 1422494 portage/distfiles > > > > > > That put's portage at about 220mb. However, the download is always > > > compressed and only the changes are sent (as well as a small amount of > > > data to figure out what has changed). > > > > Oops, yeah, the real number for me is 318040, having emptied distfiles. > > That's strange. The portage tree should be roughly the same (maybe a small > difference due to fs) for both of us. Maybe you have stuff in /usr/portage/ > packages as well? > > Jason > > -- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list > /usr/portage/packages is 46556, difference is 271484. -- Collins Richey - Denver Area if you fill your heart with regrets of yesterday and the worries of tomorrow, you have no today to be thankful for. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
