On Thu, 2009-09-10 at 14:56 +, Grant Edwards wrote:
> The reported 14 hours for OOo isn't as bad as I thought it
> might be. I used Gentoo for many years on a machine that took
> more than 24hrs to build OOo. You did learn to plan updates of
> the big packages.
Oh, I remember those days... a
On 2009-09-10, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 14:37:40 + (UTC), Grant Edwards wrote:
>
>> One cringes at the thought of updating xulrunner or OOo on a
>> netbook. Presumably one would use binary packages for packages
>> like those.
>
> Or just leave the emerge running overnight, i
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 14:37:40 + (UTC), Grant Edwards wrote:
> One cringes at the thought of updating xulrunner or OOo on a
> netbook. Presumably one would use binary packages for packages
> like those.
Or just leave the emerge running overnight, it worked for me.
--
Neil Bothwick
640K sho
On 2009-09-10, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> But I doubt the wisdom of updating an SSD netbook on the machine itself:
>
> 1. Wear on the SSD itself with all those compiles
> 2. It's sloow
One cringes at the thought of updating xulrunner or OOo on a
netbook. Presumably one would use binary packages
On 2009-09-10, Maxim Wexler wrote:
> Is there some sort of rule-of-thumb when it comes to timing or
> spacing their updates that members use to keep gentoo happy?
I find every week or two to be sufficient. I've found that if
you wait too long (e.g. no updates for months at a time),
you're much
5 matches
Mail list logo