[gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

Am Sat, 10 Feb 2018 21:20:16 + schrieb Wol's lists: > On 10/02/18 20:06, Rich Freeman wrote: >> On Sat, Feb 10, 2018 at 2:52 PM, Kai Krakow >> wrote: >>> Am Sat, 10 Feb 2018 19:38:56 + schrieb Wols Lists: >>> On 10/02/18 18:56, Kai Krakow wrote: > role and

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

On 10/02/18 20:06, Rich Freeman wrote: On Sat, Feb 10, 2018 at 2:52 PM, Kai Krakow wrote: Am Sat, 10 Feb 2018 19:38:56 + schrieb Wols Lists: On 10/02/18 18:56, Kai Krakow wrote: role and /usr takes the role of /, and /home already took the role of /usr (that's why

[gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

Am Sat, 10 Feb 2018 15:06:06 -0500 schrieb Rich Freeman: > On Sat, Feb 10, 2018 at 2:52 PM, Kai Krakow > wrote: >> Am Sat, 10 Feb 2018 19:38:56 + schrieb Wols Lists: >> >>> On 10/02/18 18:56, Kai Krakow wrote: role and /usr takes the role of /, and /home already

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

On Sat, Feb 10, 2018 at 2:52 PM, Kai Krakow wrote: > Am Sat, 10 Feb 2018 19:38:56 + schrieb Wols Lists: > >> On 10/02/18 18:56, Kai Krakow wrote: >>> role and /usr takes the role of /, and /home already took the role of >>> /usr (that's why it's called /usr, it was user

[gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

Am Sat, 10 Feb 2018 19:38:56 + schrieb Wols Lists: > On 10/02/18 18:56, Kai Krakow wrote: >> role and /usr takes the role of /, and /home already took the role of >> /usr (that's why it's called /usr, it was user data in early unix). The > > Actually no, not at all. /usr is not short for

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

On 10/02/18 18:56, Kai Krakow wrote: > role and /usr takes the role of /, and /home already took the role of /usr > (that's why it's called /usr, it was user data in early unix). The Actually no, not at all. /usr is not short for USeR, it's an acronym for User System Resources, which is why it

[gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

Am Thu, 08 Feb 2018 19:02:10 -0500 schrieb Rich Freeman: > On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 6:18 PM, Wol's lists > wrote: >> >> /var/tmp is defined as the place where programs store stuff like crash >> recovery files. Mounting it tmpfs is going to screw up any programs >> that

[gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

Am Fri, 09 Feb 2018 12:30:21 +0200 schrieb gevisz: > 2018-02-09 10:11 GMT+02:00 Neil Bothwick : >> On Thu, 8 Feb 2018 23:18:19 +, Wol's lists wrote: >> >>> > More specifically, /var/tmp is traditionally supposed to be >>> > non-volatile (across reboots). >>> > >>> >

[gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

Am Fri, 09 Feb 2018 10:58:35 + schrieb Neil Bothwick: > On Fri, 09 Feb 2018 10:12:01 +, Peter Humphrey wrote: > >> > Why mess around with another tmpfs? Just set PORTAGE_TMPDIR="/tmp" in >> > make.conf. Job done! >> >> Acting on the advice of various Gentoo guides, I have this: >> >> #

[gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

Am Thu, 08 Feb 2018 14:50:31 -0500 schrieb Rich Freeman: > On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 2:17 PM, Dale wrote: >> As someone else pointed out, if you start using swap, that generally >> defeats the purpose of tmpfs. >> >> > I'll just add one thing to this, which I've probably

[gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

Am Thu, 08 Feb 2018 16:42:23 -0700 schrieb Grant Taylor: > On 02/08/2018 03:32 PM, gevisz wrote: >> In this case it would be nice to hear a reason. > > I think the reason probably goes back a number of years. When /tmp was > made volatile (ram / swap backed) there was a need for non-volatile

[gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

Am Thu, 08 Feb 2018 19:11:48 +0200 schrieb gevisz: > I never used tmpfs for portage TMPDIR before and now decided to give it > a try. > > I have 8GB of RAM and 12GB of swap on a separate partition. > > Do I correctly understood > https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Portage_TMPDIR_on_tmpfs that I can

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

2018-02-09 4:15 GMT+02:00 Ian Zimmerman : > On 2018-02-09 01:15, Wol's lists wrote: > >> > Care to cite an example of such a program in the Gentoo repo? I >> > certainly can't think of any, and I've been running with /var/tmp on >> > tmpfs for over a decade. >> >> I don't

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

2018-02-09 3:50 GMT+02:00 Dale : > gevisz wrote: >> >> You probably will be surprised, but the main reason I am trying to use >> tmpfs for /var/tmp/ is not because I want to make emerging chromium >> faster (I have no hope about that because read somewhere that it will >>

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

On Thu, 8 Feb 2018 22:50:58 +, Tsukasa Mcp_Reznor wrote: > Just adding my 2 cents EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--fail-clean" helps a ton > with tmpfs. But it doesn't help much when your chromium build fails with 30 minutes to go and a quick(ish) "ebuild path/to/ebuild merge" would have fixed it, as

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

2018-02-09 0:50 GMT+02:00 Tsukasa Mcp_Reznor <mcp_rez...@hotmail.com>: > From: freemanr...@gmail.com <freemanr...@gmail.com> on behalf of Rich > Freeman <ri...@gentoo.org> > Sent: Thursday, February 8, 2018 5:38 PM > To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org > Subjec

[gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

On 2018-02-09 01:15, Wol's lists wrote: > > Care to cite an example of such a program in the Gentoo repo? I > > certainly can't think of any, and I've been running with /var/tmp on > > tmpfs for over a decade. > > I don't know of any. vim? Although that choice was recently criticized on the

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

gevisz wrote: > > You probably will be surprised, but the main reason I am trying to use > tmpfs for /var/tmp/ is not because I want to make emerging chromium > faster (I have no hope about that because read somewhere that it will > make compilation only 10 percent faster) but because I have not

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > On 08/02/18 21:17, Dale wrote: >> I have 16GBs of memory here and have /var/tmp/portage/ on tmpfs, no >> ccache.  With the growing size of packages, I've had to put several on >> regular spinning rust to make sure enough space is available.  This is >> my list, so far.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

On 02/08/2018 03:32 PM, gevisz wrote: In this case it would be nice to hear a reason. I think the reason probably goes back a number of years. When /tmp was made volatile (ram / swap backed) there was a need for non-volatile temp space. Thus, /var/tmp was created as non-volatile

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

From: freemanr...@gmail.com <freemanr...@gmail.com> on behalf of Rich Freeman <ri...@gentoo.org> Sent: Thursday, February 8, 2018 5:38 PM To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 5:3

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 5:32 PM, gevisz wrote: > 2018-02-09 0:19 GMT+02:00 Nikos Chantziaras : >> On 08/02/18 23:31, gevisz wrote: >>> >>> I do not use ccache, and in my /var/tmp I only have /var/tmp/portage >>> and /var/tmp/genkernel (I use genkernel to

[gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

On 08/02/18 23:57, Rich Freeman wrote: On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 4:52 PM, gevisz wrote: However, it probably won't be sooner than # emerge --update --deep --with-bdeps=y --newuse --backtrack=90 --ask world --exclude chromium fails because of the "--exclude chromium" part :), as

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

2018-02-09 0:19 GMT+02:00 Nikos Chantziaras : > On 08/02/18 23:31, gevisz wrote: >> >> I do not use ccache, and in my /var/tmp I only have /var/tmp/portage >> and /var/tmp/genkernel (I use genkernel to generate initramfs image). >> >> I never use emerge and genkernel at the same

[gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

On 08/02/18 23:31, gevisz wrote: I do not use ccache, and in my /var/tmp I only have /var/tmp/portage and /var/tmp/genkernel (I use genkernel to generate initramfs image). I never use emerge and genkernel at the same time. So, why not to put the whole /var/tmp into one tmpfs? Well, someone

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

2018-02-08 23:57 GMT+02:00 Rich Freeman : > On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 4:52 PM, gevisz wrote: >> >> However, it probably won't be sooner than >> # emerge --update --deep --with-bdeps=y --newuse --backtrack=90 --ask >> world --exclude chromium >> fails because of

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 4:52 PM, gevisz wrote: > > However, it probably won't be sooner than > # emerge --update --deep --with-bdeps=y --newuse --backtrack=90 --ask > world --exclude chromium > fails because of the "--exclude chromium" part :), as I have already compiled > the

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

2018-02-08 20:13 GMT+02:00 Rich Freeman : > On 08/02/18 19:11, gevisz wrote: >> >> I never used tmpfs for portage TMPDIR before and now decided to give it a >> try. >> >> I have 8GB of RAM and 12GB of swap on a separate partition. >> >> Do I correctly understood >>

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

2018-02-08 19:47 GMT+02:00 Nikos Chantziaras : > On 08/02/18 19:11, gevisz wrote: >> >> I never used tmpfs for portage TMPDIR before and now decided >> to give it a try. >> >> I have 8GB of RAM and 12GB of swap on a separate partition. >> >> Do I correctly understood >>

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 2:05 PM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > On 08/02/18 20:13, Rich Freeman wrote: >>> >>> If you're not using ccache, then you don't need /var/tmp to be on tmpfs. >>> You >>> should only put /var/tmp/portage on tmpfs. >> >> >> I disagree on this. Unless you have

[gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

On 08/02/18 21:17, Dale wrote: I have 16GBs of memory here and have /var/tmp/portage/ on tmpfs, no ccache.  With the growing size of packages, I've had to put several on regular spinning rust to make sure enough space is available.  This is my list, so far. www-client/firefox

[gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

On 08/02/18 20:13, Rich Freeman wrote: If you're not using ccache, then you don't need /var/tmp to be on tmpfs. You should only put /var/tmp/portage on tmpfs. I disagree on this. Unless you have something that uses gobs of space on /var/tmp there is little reason not to make the whole thing a

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 12:47 PM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > On 08/02/18 19:11, gevisz wrote: >> >> I never used tmpfs for portage TMPDIR before and now decided to give it a >> try. >> >> I have 8GB of RAM and 12GB of swap on a separate partition. >> You can try it, but for

[gentoo-user] Re: /var/tmp on tmpfs

On 08/02/18 19:11, gevisz wrote: I never used tmpfs for portage TMPDIR before and now decided to give it a try. I have 8GB of RAM and 12GB of swap on a separate partition. Do I correctly understood https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Portage_TMPDIR_on_tmpfs that I can safely set in the fstab the size