On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 05:42:17PM -0400, Admin wrote:
> > I would not be so certain about this. Today, 6GB RAM is not as much as you 
> > might think. For example, the short C++ code shown here: 
> > https://kristerw.blogspot.com/2017/10/excessive-gcc-memory-usage-for-large.html
> >  
> > requires 8GB of RAM for gcc to compile. 
> 
> How real this concern is for lfs? I mean, one of the claims about Linux/GNU 
> OS is that it requires very much less resources such that even old computers 
> can be made useful again rather than being obsoleted. Also, isn't Debian 
> ported to RaspberryPi, where the system can be compiled on the target itself 
> using GCC toolchain with a lot less resources? 
> 
> Regards
> 

Depends what you want to do - if, for you, LFS is just a learning
experience or a box-ticking exercise (i.e. you don't intend to make
much use of the resulting system) then you can get by with much less
memory.  But if you want to go on to build a desktop with a modern
graphical browser then 8GB RAM (and even with that, maybe swap if you
are doing other things during the compilation) is more comfortable.

For a server, it probably varies between different packages.  Some
are fairly light to build.

So no, for LFS-only, 6GB should be adequate.  And I suspect many
people here started on LFS using old, or re-purposed hardware.  But
LFS expects you to compile things yourself - and with each compiler
release the process takes longer and probably uses more RAM, so
faster hardware becomes useful.

For debian, I have no idea if most of the available binary packages
were built natively or cross-compiled - but I suspect they were
cross-compiled.  Yes, you *can* build them natively, but for most
people using a pi I doubt that doing that for many packages will be
worth the time.

ĸen
-- 
This email was written using 100% recycled letters.
-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Reply via email to