Thomas Morley <thomasmorle...@gmail.com> writes: > Am Do., 11. Okt. 2018 um 21:54 Uhr schrieb David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org>: >> >> Thomas Morley <thomasmorle...@gmail.com> writes: >> >> > Am Do., 11. Okt. 2018 um 20:57 Uhr schrieb David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org>: >> >> >> >> Could you reinstate the regtest and try this untested patch? Not >> >> necessarily in that order since, well, the patch might well not even >> >> compile. Or work correctly. >> > >> > Will do, though I'll first wait for current 'make doc' to finish, >> > (which may end successful or with another error, ofcourse). This may >> > take some long time, because I do a one-processor run on my slow >> > laptop. >> >> What kind of processor? > > Probably bad wording, I wanted to say I did 'make doc' and not 'make > -j5 CPU_COUNT=5 doc'. > But to answer the question: > ~$ cat /proc/cpuinfo > [...] > model name : Intel(R) Pentium(R) CPU N3510 @ 1.99GHz > [...]
Well, then I don't have anything better to offer you I guess. Heck, the system I am working on is the fastest I have (takes about 30 minutes for a 9-process make doc) and its processor is a thermal mismatch to the laptop, dissipating 6 times as much power as your CPU because it has the same number of cores: model name : Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2630QM CPU @ 2.00GHz The 2-core version it replaced takes only a bit more than 4 times the power of your processor. And, well, that's the system I got this year. Because the older system with a P9300 (already an upgrade) was becoming a bit long in the tooth. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
