On Fri, 22 Dec 2006 16:45:40 +0100, Benno Schulenberg wrote: > > if binary packages were built and stored in some reasonable > > location then I could probably prune out things that I'm not > > worried about,
They are stored wherever you tell portage to store them. > But then, one day, you'll see that you've pruned something you > shouldn't have, something that one of the things you did keep needs > as a dependency. Better keep everything. Disks are gigantic these > days, surely you can spare a gigabyte or two for binary packages. du /mnt/portage/packages/ 5.5G /mnt/portage/packages/ 5.5G total That's for five machines, each having a separate package store. The last clean up was two weeks ago, but all the machines run ~arch, so there's already a lot of superceded packages in there. Your estimate of space requirements seems spot on for a single machine :) -- Neil Bothwick Intel: where Quality is job number 0.9998782345!
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
