I can't speak about squashfs. However, as Derek Tracy eluded to, you can do
other things to improve performance such as running a different init system. I
remembering trying init-ng a while back and it ran fine, but I didn't want to
take the time to mess with it too much and reverted back to sys
It seems I'm still on this list. Although it's low traffic, some interesting
stuff comes across. I don't have anything useful to add, but I'd be interested
in following the progress of your group. If the information is going to be made
public or if you are starting a forum thread, drop a line he
Alec Warner wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
lnxg33k wrote:
I added the metadata/some-cat to the rsync_exclude list by prefacing
every entry with an '*'. Vastly increased the 2nd phase of sync'ing and
cleared up some storage. I gather that the the cached
I added the metadata/some-cat to the rsync_exclude list by prefacing every
entry with an '*'. Vastly increased the 2nd phase of sync'ing and cleared up
some storage. I gather that the the cached files end up in
"/var/cache/edb/dep/usr/portage/". Would purging the rsync_exclude entries here
caus
Alec Warner wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
lnxg33k wrote:
Thanks Alec Warner for the great explanation. It still seems like by not
having portions of the tree by using EXCLUDEFORM and deleting the local
dirs that you'd save some time in the --metadata part of sync as
Thanks Alec Warner for the great explanation. It still seems like by not having
portions of the tree by using EXCLUDEFORM and deleting the local dirs that
you'd save some time in the --metadata part of sync as less ebuilds are
available to be checked. Is this simply a wrong misconception?
--
ge
Jeremy Brake wrote:
How about speeding up the wait time on updating the portage cache after
a sync.. even on my AMD 64 3500 it takes a number of minutes to chug
through..
are there any known ways to "vrrmmm" this up a little?
Jeremy
Although not exactly what you're asking, you might want to
Chris wrote:
funny that a "high performance linux" has a dead performance ML... LOL
Could be evidence that the "ricer" crowd doesn't read? (i.e. they post to more
generic lists or use other mediums instead of something specific for their needs)
--
gentoo-performance@gentoo.org mailing list
Ken Robbins wrote:
Hi my first gentoo performance came today but it way only a header no body what up with that?
Mine too and I've been listening for a while. I think this ML may be dead ...
*pokes the darkness*
--
gentoo-performance@gentoo.org mailing list
