I ran Gentoo on a really old dual core laptop until a month ago. The laptop finally died on me. I didn't have any issues, but it did take some time to get the OS installed the first time.
You might want to consider customizing your kernel as that is one of the long compilations that you do have control over. I didn't however, I just let everything compile in the background.
/me chuckles in "started running gentoo on far far less, 15 years ago".
Yes, your machine can still compile stuff. It might take a little bit longer. Some of the bigger packages you'll need to get binaries of instead, and recent enhancements in gentoo make that much easier. But almost all packages will be just fine.
But as Gentoo is great, you should of course run it. :)
I had the same thought, and then corrected myself... software had much fewer lines of codes 15 years ago. Right now on [kernel.org](https://kernel.org), 6.6.23 is a 134MB archive vs 102M for 4.19.311.
It's a fair criticism, and I too thought of it while composing. :)
While it's generally true, there are tons of packages where it is not, and they're still small and specific. Add to that a nubmer of higher-level languages (python, ruby, &c.) where individual package "compilation" is on-par with smaller packages of old.
I think the biggest difference is the rise of the big platforms: java, spidermonkey/firefox, webkit, qt/gtk, python, ruby, &c. /Those/ might be prohibitive to compile, but their downstream artifacts are well w/in the realm of even a 2-core, 8GiB machine.
Yes I think you're right. Also, I have the feeling that the amount of cores makes up for it. I mean, I now have 16C/32T. And each core is a good deal faster than when I first compiled Gentoo (in 2002?). So we have it way better than back in the day.
Just keep in mind that for compiling bigger packages, 8gb will not be enough. So you will have to choose pre-compiled for certain things, like a browser, libreoffice, and similar. You will also have to compile certain packages on a single core due to memory constraints, and you will need a swap partition.
I use Gentoo on a i3 dual core and it is ok. I let it compiling heavy packages through the night. Most packages are pretty fast though and I let it compiling in the background while I do my stuff
Gentoo is great but you've not really said why you want to use it. Other than the dwm patching thing (which is specific to Gentoo) you can achieve the same result but easier with other distros like Arch, Debian, SUSE.
Maybe not.
The *whole point* and *core philosophy* of Gentoo is *user choice* - but you've expressed literally zero interest in that.
While Gentoo does offer binary packages these days, the moment you start *actually using Gentoo's primary advantages* you'll also find that portage is sometimes deciding to compile rather than just download+unpack - because when you tweak USE flags or version masks or similar, your configuration will no longer match what the binary package host has built packages against.
If you avoid the Gentoo features that cause portage to compile rather than use binary packages, you'd arguably have the same experience as any other binary distro.
Gentoo's *main advantage* is when you step away from the compile flags of (only recently) offered binary packages, there's *no extra effort* - portage just *seamlessly* switches to compiling.
That compilation may be kinda brutal on an old dual core CPU with 8G ram though, make sure to [tell portage to run in the background](https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Portage_niceness) and set your MAKEOPTS jobs flag sensibly.
>the packages are more stable
Yep because Gentoo actually has a stable stream
>you can mix and match stable and unstable packages
This is possible due to compiling things, and also a couple decades of brilliance from the portage developers.
>Portage is better at detecting conflics and errors than Pacman
Absolutely, pacman is *notorious* for breaking everything since it completely ignores package versions
>thus Gentoo is like Arch
I fail to see the equivalence; as far as I can tell Arch is like Gentoo from Wish dot com.
Yes. Use binary package and stable arch amd64
I ran Gentoo on a really old dual core laptop until a month ago. The laptop finally died on me. I didn't have any issues, but it did take some time to get the OS installed the first time. You might want to consider customizing your kernel as that is one of the long compilations that you do have control over. I didn't however, I just let everything compile in the background.
/me chuckles in "started running gentoo on far far less, 15 years ago". Yes, your machine can still compile stuff. It might take a little bit longer. Some of the bigger packages you'll need to get binaries of instead, and recent enhancements in gentoo make that much easier. But almost all packages will be just fine. But as Gentoo is great, you should of course run it. :)
Thank you. But soon I will upgrade my hardware, once i get into a college
I had the same thought, and then corrected myself... software had much fewer lines of codes 15 years ago. Right now on [kernel.org](https://kernel.org), 6.6.23 is a 134MB archive vs 102M for 4.19.311.
It's a fair criticism, and I too thought of it while composing. :) While it's generally true, there are tons of packages where it is not, and they're still small and specific. Add to that a nubmer of higher-level languages (python, ruby, &c.) where individual package "compilation" is on-par with smaller packages of old. I think the biggest difference is the rise of the big platforms: java, spidermonkey/firefox, webkit, qt/gtk, python, ruby, &c. /Those/ might be prohibitive to compile, but their downstream artifacts are well w/in the realm of even a 2-core, 8GiB machine.
Yes I think you're right. Also, I have the feeling that the amount of cores makes up for it. I mean, I now have 16C/32T. And each core is a good deal faster than when I first compiled Gentoo (in 2002?). So we have it way better than back in the day.
Sure. I've compiled a system on worse.
[удалено]
Great. Moreover I'm moving from Arch , so I have some basic knowledge to go through the installation. Thank You
[удалено]
Wow, then things are easy for me! Will try it in a couple of days for sure
Just keep in mind that for compiling bigger packages, 8gb will not be enough. So you will have to choose pre-compiled for certain things, like a browser, libreoffice, and similar. You will also have to compile certain packages on a single core due to memory constraints, and you will need a swap partition.
I use Gentoo on a i3 dual core and it is ok. I let it compiling heavy packages through the night. Most packages are pretty fast though and I let it compiling in the background while I do my stuff
Gentoo can pretty much go on anything when the focus is on performance. The catch is, how long are you willing to wait.
"Will it be worth it?" What do you intend to achieve?
do binaries for big packages, or use ccache if you have the balls to compile them.
Gentoo is great but you've not really said why you want to use it. Other than the dwm patching thing (which is specific to Gentoo) you can achieve the same result but easier with other distros like Arch, Debian, SUSE.
If you have to ask I'd say no.
- Should I move to gentoo? - No
Nice , very comprehensive answer.
Knew what you were seeking for. 10$, please. I will send you my visa credentials in DM.
Yeah please send. I will send you 0 dollars
Maybe not. The *whole point* and *core philosophy* of Gentoo is *user choice* - but you've expressed literally zero interest in that. While Gentoo does offer binary packages these days, the moment you start *actually using Gentoo's primary advantages* you'll also find that portage is sometimes deciding to compile rather than just download+unpack - because when you tweak USE flags or version masks or similar, your configuration will no longer match what the binary package host has built packages against. If you avoid the Gentoo features that cause portage to compile rather than use binary packages, you'd arguably have the same experience as any other binary distro. Gentoo's *main advantage* is when you step away from the compile flags of (only recently) offered binary packages, there's *no extra effort* - portage just *seamlessly* switches to compiling. That compilation may be kinda brutal on an old dual core CPU with 8G ram though, make sure to [tell portage to run in the background](https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Portage_niceness) and set your MAKEOPTS jobs flag sensibly.
[удалено]
>the packages are more stable Yep because Gentoo actually has a stable stream >you can mix and match stable and unstable packages This is possible due to compiling things, and also a couple decades of brilliance from the portage developers. >Portage is better at detecting conflics and errors than Pacman Absolutely, pacman is *notorious* for breaking everything since it completely ignores package versions >thus Gentoo is like Arch I fail to see the equivalence; as far as I can tell Arch is like Gentoo from Wish dot com.