Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship




Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date. GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.
c.f. bug 424647
List Archive: gentoo-council
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-council: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: gentoo-council@g.o
From: Roy Bamford <neddyseagoon@g.o>
Subject: Re: Comparison of GLEP 54 and 'live ebuild' proposal
Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2009 23:29:29 +0000
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 2009.03.09 22:47, Thomas Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>     Attached is my comparison of the two proposals for live sources.
>     Sorry about getting it out late, I had to get ahold of a number 
> of
>     people to finish writing it up.
> 
> Cheers,
> Thomas
> -- 
> ---------
> Thomas Anderson
> Gentoo Developer
> /////////
> Areas of responsibility:
> AMD64, Secretary to the Gentoo Council
> ---------
> 
> 

- ------quoted attachment "glep54comp.txt"------
[snip]
> 
>     One important issue is what happens in the following
>     scenario:
>     	1) world update starts at 20090301@2200hrs.
> 	2) this particular update involves 100 packages so it takes
> quite
> 	along time
> 	3) The _live package is not reached until 20090302 at 1AM.
> 
>      Is the package installed as 20090301 or 20090302?
> 
[snip]

> 
Thomas,

Live has to expand to the date when the sources were fetched, otherwise 
its not 'live' by definition.
As an illustration, I install KDE 4.2 on my 25MHz 486DX with 64Mb RAM.
During the time it takes to build, 'live' is likely to have changed 
several times.

How do you handle prefetching of sources, or do you forbid 
prefetching ?
Live infers you fetch the sources at the time you need to build them 
and do the live expansion at that time. Without that you don't know how 
old your live version is.

live can change several times a day. With only one day resolution, how 
do you handle that?

- -- 
Regards,

Roy Bamford
(NeddySeagoon) a member of
gentoo-ops
forum-mods
treecleaners
trustees
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.10 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkm1pl4ACgkQTE4/y7nJvatrEACg6JF/DcOjL65KJG7XL6L1AzIx
WToAoL+JgmILR6rsxNn4G/jhnk+thcGv
=g/qP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



Replies:
Re: Comparison of GLEP 54 and 'live ebuild' proposal
-- Luca Barbato
Re: Comparison of GLEP 54 and 'live ebuild' proposal
-- Thomas Anderson
References:
Comparison of GLEP 54 and 'live ebuild' proposal
-- Thomas Anderson
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-council: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Comparison of GLEP 54 and 'live ebuild' proposal
Next by thread:
Re: Comparison of GLEP 54 and 'live ebuild' proposal
Previous by date:
Comparison of GLEP 54 and 'live ebuild' proposal
Next by date:
Re: Comparison of GLEP 54 and 'live ebuild' proposal


Updated Jun 17, 2009

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-council mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Contact us.