On 2/13/21 4:53 PM, Zac Medico wrote: > On 2/13/21 4:37 PM, Zac Medico wrote: >> On 2/11/21 1:17 AM, Michał Górny wrote: >>> On Wed, 2021-02-10 at 19:51 +0100, Lars Wendler wrote: >>>> On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 19:57:48 +0200 Andreas K. Hüttel wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> I'm announcing a new project here - "binhost" >>>>> >>>>> "The Gentoo Binhost project aims to provide readily installable, >>>>> precompiled packages for a subset of configurations, via central >>>>> binary package hosting. Currently we are still in the conceptual >>>>> planning stage. " >>>>> >>>>> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Binhost >>>>> >>>>> If you're interested in helping out, feel free to add yourself on the >>>>> wiki page. >>>>> >>>>> Note that I see actually *building* the packages not as the central >>>>> point of the project (that could be e.g. a side effect of a >>>>> tinderbox). I'm more concerned about >>>>> * what configurations should we use >>>>> * what portage features are still needed or need improvements (e.g. >>>>> binpkg signing and verification) >>>>> * how should hosting look like >>>>> * and how we can test this on a limited scale before it goes "into >>>>> production" >>>>> * ... >>>>> >>>>> Comments, ideas, flamebaits? :D >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Andreas >>>>> >>>> >>>> It would be great to improve portage speed with handling binpkgs. I >>>> already have my own binhost for a couple of Gentoo systems and even >>>> though these systems don't have to compile anything themselves, >>>> installing ~100 to ~200 binpkgs takes way more than an hour of >>>> installation time. Arch Linux' pacman only takes a fraction of this >>>> time for the very same task. >>>> I know that I compare apples with pears here but even reducing the >>>> current portage time by 50% would be a huge improvement. >>> >>> Is that really a problem? For me, Portage takes about an hour just to >>> do the dependency processing these days. In fact, building from sources >>> is now faster than dependency calculations. >> >> The ratio of these times is dependent on the complexity of the >> dependencies involved, and so is the answer to your question. > > Also, in the context of binary packages, dependencies calculations are > generally simpler for binary packages because their USE conditionals and > slot-operator := dependencies are frozen in a particular state. This > dramatically reduces the search space involved in dependency calculation.
IUSE_RUNTIME will obviously introduce conditionals in binary package dependencies, but we should welcome these conditionals because they will provide useful flexibility. I think IUSE_RUNTIME will be a very nice feature to have for project binhost, since it will allow binary package dependencies to behave with flexibility that more closely resembles the flexibility of ebuild dependencies. -- Thanks, Zac
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
