On 21/01/2015 17:42, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 10:17 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckin...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> On 21/01/2015 15:23, Alec Ten Harmsel wrote: >>> On 01/21/2015 07:47 AM, Sam Bishop wrote: >>>>> So I've been thinking crazy thoughts. >>>>> >>>>> Theoretically it can't be that hard to do a complete package binhost for >>>>> gentoo. >>> I love that you qualify this with "theoretically." >>> >>>>> >>>>> To be clear, when i say complete, Im referring to building, all >>>>> versions of all ebuilds marked stable or unstable on amd64, with every >>>>> combination of use flags. >>> Every ebuild with every combination of USE flags? This is likely >>> impossible, and definitely not feasible. >> >> A sentence: flameyes' blog describes just how long it takes to do basic >> runs and the difficulties attached >> > > To be fair, this project wouldn't have to deal with all the error > reporting/etc which the tinderbox does have to deal with. It also > won't be predominantly run in conditions where failures are > anticipated (new system packages, etc). It also doesn't have to do > tests/etc, though that would obviously be nice. Obviously it will > still take just as long to build.
To be equally fair, I was responding to the OP's idea that it is feasible to do this: "To be clear, when i say complete, Im referring to building, all versions of all ebuilds marked stable or unstable on amd64, with every combination of use flags." That is well-nigh impossible in any reasonable time frame. How many packages in the tree? My trusty find command and some guessing tell me around 18,000, plus 8309 lines in profiles/use.*. I shudder to think how much compiling that will take. I mentioned Diego's tinderbox because that's a real-life example of building everything in a build-host type environment and how long it takes to compile just one run. > > Again, I suggest walking before running here. Try building a binpkg > repository for @world with only kde-meta in the world file on the kde > desktop profile with no other changes other than # jobs/etc (or pick > gnome if you prefer). See how much effort that takes to get working > (and keep up to date) and use that as a guide for what it will take to > go beyond that. Just that would be very useful - it would be a great > tool for anybody who manages to break their toolchains or dealing with > a very stale install. Agreed. I think what would be useful in real life would be binpkgs for each profile in the tree with default USE for each, done once a week or once a fortnight. Think in terms of stage3 raised to the next level. Useful for getting oneself out of a jam - it's quite surprising how many people have deleted gcc or all versions of python then come here for advice. Usually they get told to unpack the package from stage3 in a chroot - recent binpkgs are a cool nice-to-have. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
