1 |
On 2/13/21 4:37 PM, Zac Medico wrote: |
2 |
> On 2/11/21 1:17 AM, Michał Górny wrote: |
3 |
>> On Wed, 2021-02-10 at 19:51 +0100, Lars Wendler wrote: |
4 |
>>> On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 19:57:48 +0200 Andreas K. Hüttel wrote: |
5 |
>>> |
6 |
>>>> Hi all, |
7 |
>>>> |
8 |
>>>> I'm announcing a new project here - "binhost" |
9 |
>>>> |
10 |
>>>> "The Gentoo Binhost project aims to provide readily installable, |
11 |
>>>> precompiled packages for a subset of configurations, via central |
12 |
>>>> binary package hosting. Currently we are still in the conceptual |
13 |
>>>> planning stage. " |
14 |
>>>> |
15 |
>>>> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Binhost |
16 |
>>>> |
17 |
>>>> If you're interested in helping out, feel free to add yourself on the |
18 |
>>>> wiki page. |
19 |
>>>> |
20 |
>>>> Note that I see actually *building* the packages not as the central |
21 |
>>>> point of the project (that could be e.g. a side effect of a |
22 |
>>>> tinderbox). I'm more concerned about |
23 |
>>>> * what configurations should we use |
24 |
>>>> * what portage features are still needed or need improvements (e.g. |
25 |
>>>> binpkg signing and verification) |
26 |
>>>> * how should hosting look like |
27 |
>>>> * and how we can test this on a limited scale before it goes "into |
28 |
>>>> production" |
29 |
>>>> * ... |
30 |
>>>> |
31 |
>>>> Comments, ideas, flamebaits? :D |
32 |
>>>> |
33 |
>>>> Cheers, |
34 |
>>>> Andreas |
35 |
>>>> |
36 |
>>> |
37 |
>>> It would be great to improve portage speed with handling binpkgs. I |
38 |
>>> already have my own binhost for a couple of Gentoo systems and even |
39 |
>>> though these systems don't have to compile anything themselves, |
40 |
>>> installing ~100 to ~200 binpkgs takes way more than an hour of |
41 |
>>> installation time. Arch Linux' pacman only takes a fraction of this |
42 |
>>> time for the very same task. |
43 |
>>> I know that I compare apples with pears here but even reducing the |
44 |
>>> current portage time by 50% would be a huge improvement. |
45 |
>> |
46 |
>> Is that really a problem? For me, Portage takes about an hour just to |
47 |
>> do the dependency processing these days. In fact, building from sources |
48 |
>> is now faster than dependency calculations. |
49 |
> |
50 |
> The ratio of these times is dependent on the complexity of the |
51 |
> dependencies involved, and so is the answer to your question. |
52 |
|
53 |
Also, in the context of binary packages, dependencies calculations are |
54 |
generally simpler for binary packages because their USE conditionals and |
55 |
slot-operator := dependencies are frozen in a particular state. This |
56 |
dramatically reduces the search space involved in dependency calculation. |
57 |
-- |
58 |
Thanks, |
59 |
Zac |