Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 9:49 AM Dale wrote:
>> I have noticed the OOM killing the wrong thing as well. In a way, how
>> does it know what it should kill really??? After all, the process using
>> the most memory may not be the problem but another one, or more, could.
>> I
On Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 9:49 AM Dale wrote:
>
> I have noticed the OOM killing the wrong thing as well. In a way, how
> does it know what it should kill really??? After all, the process using
> the most memory may not be the problem but another one, or more, could.
> I guess in most cases the
Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 9:13 AM Dale wrote:
>> Runaway processes is one reason I expanded my memory to 32GBs. It gives
>> me more wiggle room for portage to be on tmpfs.
>>
> That is my other issue. 99% of the time the OOM killer is preferred
> when this happens versus
On Saturday, 29 February 2020 14:30:26 GMT Robert Bridge wrote:
> > On 29 Feb 2020, at 13:57, Rich Freeman wrote:
> >
> > Maybe something has changed in the last few years and swap is actually
> > useful, but I'm skeptical. I always tend to end up with GB of free
> > RAM and a churning hard
> On 29 Feb 2020, at 13:57, Rich Freeman wrote:
>
> Maybe something has changed in the last few years and swap is actually
> useful, but I'm skeptical. I always tend to end up with GB of free
> RAM and a churning hard drive when I enable it. On SSD I'm sure it
> will perform better, but
On Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 9:13 AM Dale wrote:
>
> Runaway processes is one reason I expanded my memory to 32GBs. It gives
> me more wiggle room for portage to be on tmpfs.
>
That is my other issue. 99% of the time the OOM killer is preferred
when this happens versus having the system just grind
Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 4:33 AM Wols Lists wrote:
>> I just have a massive swap space, and /var/tmp/portage is a tmpfs. So
>> everything gets a fast tmpfs build, and it spills into swap as required
>> (hopefully almost never).
>>
> I can articulate a bunch of reasons that on
On Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 4:33 AM Wols Lists wrote:
>
> I just have a massive swap space, and /var/tmp/portage is a tmpfs. So
> everything gets a fast tmpfs build, and it spills into swap as required
> (hopefully almost never).
>
I can articulate a bunch of reasons that on paper say that this is
On 24/02/20 08:30, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Feb 2020 18:59:27 -0800, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
>
>> In a desperate act to satisfy the ever increasing build space
>> requirements for firefox and its kin, I'd symlinked /var/tmp/portage to
>> a subdirectory of /usr/portage. And webrsync does
On Sun, 23 Feb 2020 18:59:27 -0800, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
> In a desperate act to satisfy the ever increasing build space
> requirements for firefox and its kin, I'd symlinked /var/tmp/portage to
> a subdirectory of /usr/portage. And webrsync does "rsync ... --delete
> ...", so now you see where
On 2020-02-23 16:47, Rich Freeman wrote:
> > emerge-webrsync has just eaten my /usr/portage :-( ;-(
> >
> Offhand I'm not sure why it broke, but the gentoo repo is completely
> disposable. When this sort of thing happens I generally just:
>
> cd /usr
> mv portage portage-old
> emerge-webrsync
11 matches
Mail list logo
