Re: [gentoo-user] Re: long compiles
On Wed, 13 Sep 2023 21:20:20 - (UTC), Grant Edwards wrote: > About a year ago I finally gave up building Chromium and switched to > www-client/google-chrome. It got to the point where it sometimes took > longer to build Chromium than it did for the next version to come out. That's why I run stable Chromium on an otherwise testing system. -- Neil Bothwick We all know what comes after 'X', said Tom, wisely. pgpwfhEq3DXLG.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[gentoo-user] Re: long compiles
On 2023-09-13, Kristian Poul Herkild wrote: > Nothing compares to Chromium (browser) in terms of compilation times. On > my system with 12 core threads it takes about 8 hours to compile - which > is 4 times longer than 10 years ago with 2 core threads ;) About a year ago I finally gave up building Chromium and switched to www-client/google-chrome. It got to the point where it sometimes took longer to build Chromium than it did for the next version to come out. -- Grant
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: long compiles
On Tue, 12 Sep 2023 21:01:48 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: > But anyways, this is not really about how to deal with long compiles, I > was asking what current packages take a long time after a 5 year > absence. > > The answer is what it was always - browsers and libreoffice. I do recall > icu being a bit of a beast back then LibreOffice doesn't seem too bad these days. icu and boost are a pain because of the number of other packages they rebuild. -- Neil Bothwick Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak. pgpoFHtA2NgXP.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[gentoo-user] Re: long compiles
On 2023-09-12, Alan McKinnon wrote: [...] > But anyways, this is not really about how to deal with long compiles, I was > asking what current packages take a long time after a 5 year absence. > > The answer is what it was always - browsers and libreoffice. I do recall > icu being a bit of a beast back then I remember insn-attrtab.c making the GCC compilation swap a lot :-) https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29442 -- Nuno Silva
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: long compiles
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 11:19 AM Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > On 11/09/2023 22:19, Alan McKinnon wrote: > > chromium has been building since 10:14, it's now 21:16 and still going > > so 9 hours at least on this machine to build a browser - almost as bad > > as openoffice at it's worst (regularly took 12 hours). Nodejs also took > > a while, but I didn't record time. > > What's your CPU and how much RAM? Even on my older system I had (an > 4-core i5 2500K) libreoffice took like 2 hours or so to build. > > > > What other packages have huge build times? > > IIRC, dev-qt/qtwebengine is one of the heaviest when it comes to build > times. > > Anyway, a nice way to cut down on build times is to build on tmpfs. To > do that however with heavy packages like that, I had to upgrade to 32GB > RAM. There was a large price drop in the memory market a couple months > ago, so I snatched a 32GB DDR4 3600 kit (2x16GB) for like 80€. So now > with plenty of RAM, I configured a 14GB tmpfs in /var/tmp/portage. I > never hit swap when emerging. > That's not an option for me, this is a corporate laptop with 16G RAM and a case I may not open :-) I'm not interested in a remote build host or distcc either But anyways, this is not really about how to deal with long compiles, I was asking what current packages take a long time after a 5 year absence. The answer is what it was always - browsers and libreoffice. I do recall icu being a bit of a beast back then Alan -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
[gentoo-user] Re: long compiles
On 11/09/2023 23:21, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Yup, that jibes with what I see. Oh well, just means that the need for
overnight compiles did not go away haha
Ever since I added the following to my make.conf:
PORTAGE_NICENESS=19
PORTAGE_IONICE_COMMAND="sh -c \"schedtool -D \${PID} && ionice -c 3 -p
\${PID}\""
I never needed overnight compiles again. Make sure sys-process/schedtool
is installed. As long as you have plenty of RAM so the system doesn't
swap, you can use the system normally even while building monster
packages. I can even play video games without issue while portage is
emerging now.
[gentoo-user] Re: long compiles
On 11/09/2023 22:19, Alan McKinnon wrote: chromium has been building since 10:14, it's now 21:16 and still going so 9 hours at least on this machine to build a browser - almost as bad as openoffice at it's worst (regularly took 12 hours). Nodejs also took a while, but I didn't record time. What's your CPU and how much RAM? Even on my older system I had (an 4-core i5 2500K) libreoffice took like 2 hours or so to build. What other packages have huge build times? IIRC, dev-qt/qtwebengine is one of the heaviest when it comes to build times. Anyway, a nice way to cut down on build times is to build on tmpfs. To do that however with heavy packages like that, I had to upgrade to 32GB RAM. There was a large price drop in the memory market a couple months ago, so I snatched a 32GB DDR4 3600 kit (2x16GB) for like 80€. So now with plenty of RAM, I configured a 14GB tmpfs in /var/tmp/portage. I never hit swap when emerging.
