Port or package to install Gnome?

[moecraft]

I don't know what is the best choice. I tried to compile gnome but it spend 7 hrs! and at the end of the compilation all of the / partition was full and i can't install mozilla and another programs. So If i use pkg_add to install it i would get a slow GNOME?.

[Speedy]

The idea behind tweaking the make.conf is to customize your builds for your CPU and your needs (CFLAGS, etc). This is why you rebuild the world after install, to exclude redundant code and make most of your CPU.
Next step is to customize the software you are installing by enabling options and features you need and excluding what you don't need, to reduce the size of install.
If all this does not make any sense to you then binary install will do.
I doubt you will notice any slowdown, unless your hardware is really old.

[fronclynne]

I don't know what is the best choice. I tried to compile gnome but it spend 7 hrs! and at the end of the compilation all of the / partition was full and i can't install mozilla and another programs. So If i use pkg_add to install it i would get a slow GNOME?.
What is the output of df? (df -h if you're lazy like me)

Also Speedy (http://forums.freebsd.org/member.php?u=709) is correct. You won't notice any slowdown unless you're running painfully primitive hardware.

[teaone]

How did you build gnome2 meta-port?

to avoid out-of-disk space, use make install clean.
You can use 'portmanager x11/gnome2'. It will clean a successful build port before continuing to the next port.