On 11/08/2014 03:08 AM, hasufell wrote: > On 11/07/2014 07:54 PM, Matthias Maier wrote: >>> Well, you're not comparing like with like. Paludis with "everything >>> turned off" does more than Portage with "everything turned on". If all >>> you're looking for is the wrong answer as fast as possible, there are >>> easier ways of getting it... >> >> The last time I compared the resolver speed of portage and paludis both >> needed almost the same time. >> >> Do you have a speed comparison with a similar feature set of both? (Or, >> alternatively, the speedup one gains by tuning paludis to be as fast as >> possible). >> > > I think you didn't get the idea: it doesn't make much sense to compare > the speed if the correctness differs. > > Also, I don't understand these discussions. The time dependency > resolving takes is marginal compared to the whole update process, no > matter what PM you use. > *ahem*
On my old notebook, which luckily suicided thanks to Lenovo's built in obsolete device detection ... emerge -auNDv world took up to 35 minutes So, if something like RUBY_TARGETS or a random useflag changes, it takes me literally DAYS to figure out a valid solution where portage can figure out an upgrade path. No, it's not marginal.
