Archives
Archives
| From: | Neil Bothwick <neil@××××××××××.uk> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-user@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage performance dropped considerably | ||
| Date: | Mon, 27 Jan 2014 21:48:48 | ||
| Message-Id: | 20140127214837.47278679@digimed.co.uk | ||
| In Reply to: | Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage performance dropped considerably by hasufell |
||
| 1 | On Mon, 27 Jan 2014 14:57:10 +0100, hasufell wrote: |
| 2 | |
| 3 | > If it's about performance (in the sense of speed), then paludis is |
| 4 | > worse, because dependency calculation is more complex/complete there. |
| 5 | |
| 6 | That makes no sense at all. Paludis is written in a different language |
| 7 | using different algorithms. It's not about the amount of work it does so |
| 8 | much as how efficiently it does it. |
| 9 | |
| 10 | |
| 11 | -- |
| 12 | Neil Bothwick |
| 13 | |
| 14 | Earlier, I didn't have time to finish anything. This time I w |
| File name | MIME type |
|---|---|
| signature.asc | application/pgp-signature |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage performance dropped considerably | hasufell <hasufell@g.o> |