| 1 |
On Sat, Feb 01, 2003 at 07:16:44PM +1000, Rendhalver [Peter Brown] wrote: |
| 2 |
> ah ok so you want to put the actual portage tree into a database yes? |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
nope, I think it would be much nicer to portage to create a mirror |
| 5 |
image of the portage tree in a database, together with all textual |
| 6 |
information available. I want to leave the portage as it is for |
| 7 |
installing and updating packages but I want to be able to get events |
| 8 |
from portage when new packages arrive (rsync), are installed (emerge) |
| 9 |
or uninstalled (unmerge) or updated (emerge -u), so I can keep track of |
| 10 |
it. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Of course it would be a solution to manage everything in a database, hmm |
| 13 |
it is a tree you know, a big tree in recent times, so it should be a |
| 14 |
database object. But the evolution of portage was filesystem oriented, |
| 15 |
which is understandable for portability, stability and transparency. At |
| 16 |
least the filesystem is a database too, a slow one though, but fast |
| 17 |
enough for the installation purposes, measured against the compilation |
| 18 |
and download times. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
I often bothered about the problem of searching a package by keyword or |
| 21 |
package name (emerge -s foo) and (emerge -S foo), when I just want to |
| 22 |
get a quick overview about a topic or want to look up this new package I |
| 23 |
just heard of in this newgroup yesterday. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
This operation takes much too long for my taste and thats what I like to |
| 26 |
keep in a database. I know there are textual database systems like |
| 27 |
htref, but I don't understand their installation and configuration |
| 28 |
syntax. Hmm, I'm a C Programmer you know, it is much easier to me to |
| 29 |
put everything in a Berkeley DB put a job in the background and fire |
| 30 |
some events or raise some signals. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
BYE INGO |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives