>Perhaps i should consider using the source myself, because of
>
>hafi@i5_64 ~ $ loffice
>/usr/bin/loffice: line 2: 12258 Illegal instruction
>/usr/lib64/libreoffice/program/soffice "$@"
>
>which i just got with an i5. Should i?
That would give me these new packages
Calculating dependencies... done!
[ebuild N ] virtual/fortran-0 0 kB
[ebuild N ] dev-libs/libevent-2.0.16 0 kB
[ebuild N ] sys-process/time-1.7-r1 101 kB
[ebuild N ] app-admin/eselect-boost-0.3 0 kB
[ebuild N ] dev-util/boost-build-1.46.1 41,017 kB
[ebuild N ] virtual/perl-Compress-Raw-Zlib-2.024 0 kB
[ebuild N ] x11-themes/gnome-icon-theme-3.2.1.2 13,682 kB
[ebuild N ] dev-libs/boost-1.46.1-r1 0 kB
[ebuild N ] dev-perl/Archive-Zip-1.300.0 193 kB
[ebuild N ] sci-libs/hdf5-1.8.4-r1 7,013 kB
[ebuild N ] sci-libs/fftw-3.2.2 3,414 kB
[ebuild N ] virtual/freedesktop-icon-theme-0 0 kB
[ebuild N ] media-libs/vigra-1.7.1-r1 27,814 kB
[ebuild N ] net-libs/xulrunner-1.9.2.20 0 kB
[ebuild N ] dev-util/mdds-0.5.3-r1 90 kB
[ebuild N ] app-office/libreoffice-3.4.5.2 240,214 kB
Total: 16 packages (16 new),
>Should i wait for a fixed libreoffice-bin? Hm.
libreoffice-bin doesn't require the above packages. Perhaps it failes
therefore? *g*
Hartmut
--
Usenet-ABC-Wiki http://www.usenet-abc.de/wiki/
Von Usern fuer User :-)
02-19-2012, 01:36 PM
Mick
libreoffice-bin-3.4.5.2 broken ?
On Sunday 19 Feb 2012 12:57:51 Meik Frischke wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 19. Februar 2012, 12:26:57 schrieb Mick:
> > On Sunday 19 Feb 2012 11:45:25 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> > > On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 12:58:35 +0200, Thanasis wrote:
> > > > > [root@hactar ~ 0]% genlop -t libreoffice
> > > > >
> > > > > * app-office/libreoffice
> > > > >
> > > > > Wed Feb 15 10:23:58 2012 >>> app-office/libreoffice-3.5.0.3
> > > > >
> > > > > merge time: 40 minutes and 52 seconds.
> > > >
> > > > Impressive. What's your hardware configuration, Neil?
> > >
> > > Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2600K CPU @ 3.40GHz with 16GB RAM.
> >
> > Hmm ... I've got a 1st generation i7 on my laptop and it is no-where near
> > that fast. :-(
> >
> > Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU Q 720 @ 1.60GHz with 4G RAM.
> >
> > Sun Jan 29 21:47:46 2012 >>> app-office/libreoffice-3.4.5.2
> >
> > merge time: 1 hour, 34 minutes and 43 seconds.
> >
> > Is it just down to the CPU or are you running /var/tmp/portage on some
> > turbo- charged fs?
>
> IO does really slow down the compilation progress a lot. Having
> PORTAGE_TMPDIR on tmpfs saves about half an hour (compared to reiserfs on
> a 7200rpm disk) for me :
> Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 920 @ 2.67GHz
> Thu Feb 16 17:42:35 2012 >>> app-office/libreoffice-3.5.0.3
> merge time: 50 minutes and 39 seconds.
>
> With 4GB Ram thats not an option for you though...
My /var partition is on ext4.
My CPU is admittedly slower, but even so I wouldn't think that it would take
more than _twice_ as long as Neil's.
--
Regards,
Mick
02-19-2012, 01:40 PM
Alecks Gates
libreoffice-bin-3.4.5.2 broken ?
I would be curious to see the results of compiling libreoffice with PORTAGE_TMPDIR on btrfs with compress=lzo.
On Feb 19, 2012 9:37 AM, "Mick" <michaelkintzios@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday 19 Feb 2012 12:57:51 Meik Frischke wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 19. Februar 2012, 12:26:57 schrieb Mick:
> > On Sunday 19 Feb 2012 11:45:25 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> > > On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 12:58:35 +0200, Thanasis wrote:
> With 4GB Ram thats not an option for you though...
My /var partition is on ext4.
My CPU is admittedly slower, but even so I wouldn't think that it would take
more than _twice_ as long as Neil's.
--
Regards,
Mick
02-19-2012, 02:21 PM
Hartmut Figge
libreoffice-bin-3.4.5.2 broken ?
Hartmut Figge:
>libreoffice-bin doesn't require the above packages. Perhaps it failes
>therefore? *g*
No. I had emerged them with oneshot to test that and to avoid, that
emerging them would count to the time required to emerge libreoffice.
Here are the results for my machine.
Intel(R) Core(TM) i5 CPU 760 @ 2.80GHz with 16GB RAM.
i5_64 hafi # time emerge libreoffice
real 72m45.187s
user 178m12.372s
sys 16m49.719s
In case someone is interested what happened during compiling:
http://www.triffids.de/pub/screenshot/lo120219.png (9 KB)
Hartmut
--
Usenet-ABC-Wiki http://www.usenet-abc.de/wiki/
Von Usern fuer User :-)
02-20-2012, 01:55 PM
"Stefan G. Weichinger"
libreoffice-bin-3.4.5.2 broken ?
Am 18.02.2012 17:57, schrieb Neil Bothwick:
> [root@hactar ~ 0]% genlop -t libreoffice
> * app-office/libreoffice
>
> Wed Feb 15 10:23:58 2012 >>> app-office/libreoffice-3.5.0.3
> merge time: 40 minutes and 52 seconds.
>
> Incidentally, the full output from genlop -t shows a steady decrease in
> build times as version numbers increase. It looks like optimisation of
> the old OOo code is ongoing.
for reference:
vendor_id : GenuineIntel
cpu family : 6
model : 42
model name : Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2600 CPU @ 3.40GHz
# genlop -t libreoffice
* app-office/libreoffice
Mon Feb 20 12:20:57 2012 >>> app-office/libreoffice-3.5.0.3
merge time: 44 minutes and 54 seconds.
It was my first build of libreoffice, I used the binary version before.
8 gigs of RAM dedicated to PORTAGE_TMPDIR, mounted as tmpfs.
libreoffice-bin-3.4.5.2 broken ?
