-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 18/12/14 06:10, Frank Steinmetzger wrote:
I once -- just for fun -- compiled Firefox on an Atom N450. This
has no effect on the loading time of 20 seconds. ^^
And how long did it take?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 01:07:34PM +0300, the wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 18/12/14 06:10, Frank Steinmetzger wrote:
I once -- just for fun -- compiled Firefox on an Atom N450. This
has no effect on the loading time of 20 seconds. ^^
And how long did it
On Wed, 17 Dec 2014 23:59:59 +0200
Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
On 18/12/2014 04:45, Harry Putnam wrote:
Is there any advantage one way or the other emerging firefox.bin vs
firefox?
Depends on your needs:
firefox:
- pro: you get all the USE flags
- pro: you don't
On Thu, 18 Dec 2014 03:59:58 -0500
cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
That is interesting, but firefox requires 8g I think of temp space,
the very package which takes so long. I have 16g of memory, but I
wonder if my whole system would start to crawl.
I would try it. I have only 8GiB. I used to
Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com writes:
On 18/12/2014 04:45, Harry Putnam wrote:
Is there any advantage one way or the other emerging firefox.bin vs firefox?
Depends on your needs:
firefox:
- pro: you get all the USE flags
- pro: you don't get bundled libs from Mozilla, the ebuild
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 01:46:45AM -0500, Harry Putnam wrote:
Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com writes:
On 18/12/2014 04:45, Harry Putnam wrote:
Is there any advantage one way or the other emerging firefox.bin vs
firefox?
Depends on your needs:
[…]
firefox-bin:
[…]
- con:
6 matches
Mail list logo
