On 4/3/2014 19:52, J David wrote: > > The net effect of all of this is that even if you do take 24 hours and > rebuild all the ports that depend on perl because of that foobar > vulnerability, including bazqux, you *still* end up pissing off the > bazqux users because it rev'd bazqux from 1.5 to 2.0 and 2.0 isn't > backward compatible. And the people using bazqux don't take "well > foobar had a security issue" as a reason for disrupting them, because > they don't care one whit about foobar.
You've been throwing out this 8000 packages = 24 hours bit for a couple of days now. Our setup builds packages at an average rate of 600 packages an hour, ranging from 100 to 1600 pkg/hour impulse, and that is counting the monster-size packages. If you are really serious about all these requirements, get a better build machine. You could probably build 8000 packages with a single machine in 10 hours or less depending on the actual packages (e.g. if they are mostly perl packages it could be faster) I don't think anybody is going to reprogram the logic of poudriere though. This is just an academic discussion of what could be done, but I doubt anybody wants to actually implement it due to the potential side effects (and the (limited) gain vs the implementation cost). John _______________________________________________ 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"
