I use a shared NFS /usr/portage/ among 4 computers (a server, 2 desktops and a test machine) and it works fine, just the server needs to sync in the middle of the night, and as I have mostly Pentium3 (server + 2 workstations), the server and my own workstation are setup to build binary packages - the server builds first, but as it doesn't use X, there are some packages that my ws builds (after merging the already built packages) and then the second and slower ws merges only binary packages. All of them, including the test machine, uses distcc, so everything is faster.
I guess that sharing /var/cache/edb is not a good idea, as far as I know portage. I am thinking on sharing /var/portage thow And that's a good point: /var/portage gets pretty full of hundreds of megs once in a while, and so does /usr/portage/distfiles and (in my case) /usr/portage/packages - so how could portage clean up by default the binary packages and the source code tarballs (and also any eventual mess left in /var/portage)? Some more command line options? Some more environment varialbles? Some more words in $FEATURES (I like this one)? -- Francisco Eric S. Johansson wrote: > this is all portage's fault.. ;-) > > my 300+ package upgrade is almost done. but OO died because of no disk > space on the laptop (yes, I will go with a binary for this one after I > clean up the mess) > > what is the best way to keep the portage files down to a reasonable > set? I clean but that never seems to remove anything from the portage > env. > > This seems like a common problem (esp for laptops) so what is a good > solution? > > single dsktops; laptops > o per machine portage cleaner > > small (3-4) networks > o http-replicator cache > o rsync cache > o per machine portage cleaner > > larger networks > o http-replicator cache > o rsync cache > o shared /usr/portage;/var/cache/edb/??? > o cach machine portage cleaner > > right? wrong? what does a portage cleaner look like? > > --- eric -- [email protected] mailing list
