Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Nicholas Jones <carpaski@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Subcategores and a C comment
Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2004 23:48:59
Message-Id: 20041004234857.GA7674@twobit.net
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Subcategores and a C comment by Luke-Jr
1 > Not neccesarilly... Open connection; fetch pkgiwant; check deps;
2 > fetch depineed; no more deps: Close connection
3 > Determining dependencies should be fast enough to keep the
4 > connection open for.
5
6 Sure... But would only require internal handling of web/ftp
7 protocols and rewriting emerge and/or doing single-dep parsing
8 for each entry... AND now that you're removed wget, you have to
9 maintain the file-states manually. That's a LOT of code with
10 LOTS of room for bugs. If someone feels up to handling all of
11 this, they can feel free to try and get it right.
12
13 It's a matter of sanity. From a programming and support
14 aspect, I'm not interested in non-consistent states. I
15 highly doubt this would be supported by dev-portage in any
16 reasonably near future as there are more important things
17 to be concerned with. It might also introduce difficulties
18 in modifying the structure of the tree later.
19
20 > How so? Fetch checksums too. And the purpose of such an
21 > ability would be to make sync-updates unneccesary.
22
23 Data gets corrupted.
24
25 Checksums of all data in the tree would be unnecessary
26 duplication of the existing system's capabilities. Why change
27 if you're simply going to reimplement everything?
28
29 GPG will introduce some of the at-sync checking of digests and
30 Manifests, but you _really_ don't want to experience the full
31 cost of verifying every file like this. It's already painful
32 with just manifest checking. (Hopefully, we'll get that sped
33 up though. Might have to write a lib for gpg.)
34
35 --NJ