On Mon, 27 May 2013 22:33:53 +0200 John Marino wrote: > On 5/27/2013 22:09, RW wrote: > > On Mon, 27 May 2013 20:38:11 +0200 > > John Marino wrote: > > > > > > No, that's something you just made up. It is however vague and > > anecdotal. We have only one data point that we know is from this > > year and not self-inflicted, even if the others are, for all we > > know it could still be fast most of the time. > > > > Some monitoring would be useful. > > > > However you slice it, a distinfo file with 1000+ entries is > completely absurd. 95% of the blame goes to Vim developers. > However, it is within the realm of feasibility to pre-package patches > in batches of 100 (or conversely 1 tarball of patches rolled for > every time patch count hits multiple of 100).
In other words downloading every patch twice. > At the very, very least maybe only HTTP hosts are listed for VIM (I > just checked bsd.sites.mk, the ftp sites are all at the end of the > list now) All 13 http links would have to fail before the ftp links are tried. > It looks like some of this was addressed in January though: I already told you that. > > I may have still been on the old bsd.sites.mk with a site > 10 > seconds per file. (this is yet another data point) We already knew that it was slow before January, so that's irrelevant. _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
