On 01/10/2014 08:16 AM, hero...@gentoo.org wrote: > Igor <lanthrus...@gmail.com> writes: > >> The ebuilds have approximately the same time to install, the failure >> rate is about the same, emerge is getting slower. > > I am curious about the slowness of emerge. > > How about profile the portage and rewrite the time-crucial part in > C/C++, or ideally, borrowing the counterpart from paludis? How feasible > is that?
Last I checked paludis wasn't faster - on average portage was a few percents faster. For python things you really want python or C instead of C++... So, what you wanted to ask was: "Which parts of pkgcore can be migrated into portage?" > I guess the dep-tree calculation is the slowest part. Yes, it's doing lots of silly dynamic things (backtracking), and portage codebase on average is not designed for speed. As a first step I would recommend profiling it and removing unneeded stuff (do less work!), rewriting parts in C is a lot of work and not needed for the first round of speedups.
