On 01/13/14 04:31 PM, Fabio Erculiani wrote:
On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 10:15 AM, "C. Bergström"
<cbergst...@pathscale.com> wrote:
On 01/13/14 03:43 PM, Alexander Berntsen wrote:
Where I work uses pkgcore[1], but not the areas which are generally
beneficial to the whole community. (We use it as part of a web application
to handle testsuites which have build dependencies.) We can blah blah about
performance of resolving package dependencies all day long,
[...]
Not sure about what you mean with "blah blah". But given the amount of
both disk caches (metadata, vdb cache) and memory caches (the
in-memory aux_db cache that portage loads using pickle (it's a dict)
takes like 70-100Mb of RAM on an average desktop system), Portage can
still take *minutes* to calculate the merge queue of a pkg with all
its deps satisfied. Ironically, launching the same emerge command
twice, will take more or less the same time.
Yeah, this is probably bad design...
ack - I know the benefits (and downsides) of pkgcore compared to
portage, but I leave that up to others who would like to voice their
opinion. It would be great to get pkgcore up to feature parity with
portage, but I don't have the resources to help with that. (In the
future, possibly next month, I will try to put some bounties)
