Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DepSet

[Jason Stubbs]

On Friday 09 December 2005 04:03, Zac Medico wrote:
> Jason Stubbs wrote:
> > On Thursday 08 December 2005 16:44, Zac Medico wrote:
> >>The middle hunk fixes a problem with block atoms that do not match any
> >>packages.  Previously, these atoms would not make it into the okay_atoms
> >> set which caused unresolved dependencies.
> >
> > Are you sure about this?
>
> Well, I'm pretty sure. You're analysis seems to be perfectly correct except
> for 2 points that you haven't accounted for:
>
> 1) The atom.key != child.key optimization prevents the atom.match(child) ^
> atom.blocks bit from working in the case that my patch handles (block atom
> that does not match any package).
>
> 2) Without the atom.key != child.key optimization, the original algorithm
> would bail out early, before all packages have been checked.  We need to
> ensure that the atom does not block _any_ of the packages before we add it
> to okay_atoms, otherwise, we risk choosing the wrong atomset/combination.
> Note that checking all the packages _does_ introduce a performance penalty
> for block atoms.

Damn optimizations. :|

Both points are correct.

--
Jason Stubbs
-- 
gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list