On Fri, 2010-07-23 at 00:25 -0400, R P Herrold wrote: > On Thu, 22 Jul 2010, JohnS wrote: > > > temp fs scares me unless I have a machine capable of RAM RAID 1 + Multi > > ECC and I have only one atm. It would be a much better way, I can't > > argue that point. > > You are missing the point that building a distribution, or > even just a few packages is going to (and had better) a binary > idempotent result. If a machine goes down, wipe the failed > partial build and do it again I'm quite sure you know how it feels to have to start over again. Time to fully script the process. I'll bang it around this weekend and take it for a run. I'll use /foo/bar/tmpfs for everything except the build output directory and go from there. I'll take ya way and see how it goes. > You just don't need multiply redundant backups and six nines > hardware, unless you need to heat your office No but I need a backup or two and maybe some notes taken here and there. Your correct on heating the office/computer room. It was 108*F today. John