| 1 |
Danny van Dyk wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> | I don't think the point was ever to be accurate, but to give a rough |
| 4 |
> | idea. If OpenOffice.org is 1047 bash units, and bash takes 1.0 minutes |
| 5 |
> | on your machine, then you know *about* how long OpenOffice.org will take |
| 6 |
> | to compile. I don't think anyone is concerned with exact numbers so |
| 7 |
> | much as ballpark figures to give them a reasonable estimate of needed |
| 8 |
> | time. |
| 9 |
> | |
| 10 |
> I don't share your optimism. I already see bug reports about wrong ETAs |
| 11 |
> ... :-/ |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Surely these can be dismissed as WONTFIX, and move on. There will always |
| 14 |
be some users who expect everything to be perfect. Round up to the |
| 15 |
nearest minute, output Estimated/Approximate/Expected emerge time: 12 |
| 16 |
minutes. This would be a great feature, and most users will not care if |
| 17 |
it takes 15 minutes when it said 12 - it's just a lot better to have a |
| 18 |
reasonable idea of emerge times. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
If it was within 10 - 20% most of the time that is still useful to most, |
| 21 |
and I think it will do better than that most of the time. Even if we |
| 22 |
could make an exact estimate of emerge time issues such as other |
| 23 |
processes using processor time etc will always throw these estimates off. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives