Re: [gentoo-user] genlop times was: migrating to gcc-3.4.4

2005-08-25 Thread Willie Wong
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 11:51:32AM +, Fernando Meira wrote: I have a P4-2.4GHz laptop. I forgot to say that the estimation time was made by genlop. And was quite wrong! It took something like 11h to compile 112 packages, (though I've interrupted while compiling gcc-3.3.6.. so it had to

Re: [gentoo-user] genlop times was: migrating to gcc-3.4.4

2005-08-25 Thread Fernando Meira
On 8/25/05, Willie Wong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 11:51:32AM +, Fernando Meira wrote: I have a P4-2.4GHz laptop. I forgot to say that the estimation time was made by genlop. And was quite wrong! It took something like 11h to compile 112 packages, (though I've

Re: [gentoo-user] genlop times was: migrating to gcc-3.4.4

2005-08-25 Thread Willie Wong
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 05:33:14PM +, Fernando Meira wrote: I would say that most of the emerged packages were emerged before.. but maybe not that much so that genlop could be accurate. Also, a new compiler was being used.. no idea how much can that change the performance. That might.

Re: [gentoo-user] genlop times was: migrating to gcc-3.4.4

2005-08-25 Thread Neil Bothwick
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 14:51:33 -0400, Willie Wong wrote: BUT!!! It seems that there is a bug with genlop and newer versions of portage because some issues with a sandbox lockfile. Search for genlop sandbox on bugs.gentoo.org for more info. In any case, for the time being, until the bug is

Re: [gentoo-user] genlop times was: migrating to gcc-3.4.4

2005-08-25 Thread Willie Wong
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 11:03:47PM +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote: On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 14:51:33 -0400, Willie Wong wrote: BUT!!! It seems that there is a bug with genlop and newer versions of portage because some issues with a sandbox lockfile. Search for genlop sandbox on bugs.gentoo.org for