For me it was a *slightly* less quicker start. Which I think don't means
much when speaking about browser.
On 06/22/2017 11:09 AM, Danny YUE wrote:
On 2017-06-22 07:43, Rasmus Thomsen <rasmus.thom...@protonmail.com> wrote:
I'm using firefox-bin ( and libreoffice-bin ) on my laptop and I didn't have
problems with either of them
Regards,
Rasmus
-------- Original Message --------
On 22 Jun 2017, 09:34, Danny YUE wrote:
On 2017-06-22 07:23, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote:
Does anyone knows why? Any idea?
The reason is in that fact, that many of it's components are in rust.
And since it was possible to dodge it until now, maintainers considered it is
not a way since now.
And, by the way, it is not that many time to build rust, as you think:
Thu Jun 22 12:34:00 2017 >>> dev-lang/rust-1.16.0
merge time: 1 hour, 48 minutes.
Than was on 1.9GHz with hardly limited portage (MAKEOPTS="-j5 -l2",
NICENESS=18, ionice -c3, and cgroupped on cpu shares and ram).
So, ~20 mins would be enough on non-limited portage and full power of that i7.
Thank you all for replying.
So it can be around 30~40 minutes or so on my i5 machine.
Just it feels strange to install something large that I would probably
never use myself.
I am considering using binary package instead of compiling it myself.
But I am afraid that using firefox-bin package would cause some
dependency problem. I once tried libreoffice-bin, but found it really
painful to resolve dependency issues during system upgrading.
Anyone tried firefox-bin smoothly?
Danny
@mva.name>
Well, I ran into the same problem with libreoffice-bin *last time*, as
Alexey.
It seems that version number of libreoffice-bin is always smaller than
libreoffice. So dependency issue is always a problem with it.
I noticed firefox-bin only has *usual* packages as dependencies...
By the way what is the difference between compiled and binary firefox
from a user's perspective?
P.S. Someone told me that people in this list do not like top-posting.
Thanks.
Danny
--
Kind regards,
Alexey Eschenko
https://skobk.in/
