Hello,
i run emerge -avuDN @world and again must recompile packages. Why, i
understand not why? I have no probs with small packages, but why
again libreoffice? I change nothing in USE Flags, but portage want
recompile. Can me explain someone why?
These are the packages that would be merged, in
On 01/11/2013 16:19, Silvio Siefke wrote:
> Hello,
>
> i run emerge -avuDN @world and again must recompile packages. Why, i
> understand not why? I have no probs with small packages, but why
> again libreoffice? I change nothing in USE Flags, but portage want
> recompile. Can me explain someone
Hello,
On Fri, 01 Nov 2013 22:40:15 +0200 Alan McKinnon
wrote:
> Thsi is not the first time you ask the question "Why does package X
> need to be rebuilt?" Every time you want to know this, run emerge
> again with the -t option, it shows the dependency tree and that shows
> you why the package i
On 02/11/2013 01:31, Silvio Siefke wrote:
>> You also need to deal with this.
>> > You masked libreoffice-4.1.2.3 but it's also still installed. That is
>> > inconsistent; either unmask it and rebuild or leave it masked and
>> > downgrade.
> Yes i mask bigger package when i saw in @world and not se
Am Freitag, 01.11.2013 um 15:19
schrieb Silvio Siefke :
> Libreoffice need long time, without big use flags.
>
> gentoomobile siefke # genlop -t libreoffice
> * app-office/libreoffice
[...]
> Fri Oct 25 00:35:01 2013 >>> app-office/libreoffice-4.1.2.3
>merge time: 17 hours, 51 minut
On Sat, 2 Nov 2013 03:38:12 +0100, waben...@gmail.com wrote:
> Maybe you should consider to use ccache. It considerable reduces the
> merge time if you have to rebuild a package.
It also creates elusive build failures with some packages, which is why I
stopped using it.
> Tue Oct 22 22:05:3
On Sat, 2 Nov 2013 09:27:38 +, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> > Maybe you should consider to use ccache. It considerable reduces the
> > merge time if you have to rebuild a package.
>
> It also creates elusive build failures with some packages, which is why
> I stopped using it.
>
> > Tue Oct
Hey,
what is with distcc? When i understand correct that can use to share
the merge process. Can i use with diffrent arch? I use gentoo on
netbook with atom and amd64 and some rootserver with same arch and a
p4 with i686. The p4 is in same network but can this pc use with atom
64 bit? Has someone
Am Samstag, 02.11.2013 um 11:55
schrieb Silvio Siefke :
> Hey,
>
> what is with distcc? When i understand correct that can use to share
> the merge process. Can i use with diffrent arch? I use gentoo on
> netbook with atom and amd64 and some rootserver with same arch and a
> p4 with i686. The p4
Am Samstag, 02.11.2013 um 09:35
schrieb Neil Bothwick :
> > Impressive, I think I'll try enabling it for specific packages that
> > will benefit and don't cause problems.
>
> On the other hand, after reading man make.conf, maybe it is not such a
> good idea except in very limited cases.
>
> Warn
Hello,
On Sat, 2 Nov 2013 14:24:49 +0100 wrote:
> Many years ago I used distcc. At this time I had some slower machines
> (2 x AMD K5, 3x AMD K6) and distcc was really a booster for many
> bigger packages, but it doesn't reduce merge time for small packages
> and it also causes problems with som
11 matches
Mail list logo
