| 1 |
Hello Heroxbd, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
Friday, January 10, 2014, 4:16:47 AM, you wrote: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
>> The ebuilds have approximately the same time to install, the failure |
| 6 |
>> rate is about the same, emerge is getting slower. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
> I am curious about the slowness of emerge. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> How about profile the portage and rewrite the time-crucial part in |
| 11 |
> C/C++, or ideally, borrowing the counterpart from paludis? How feasible |
| 12 |
> is that? |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
> I guess the dep-tree calculation is the slowest part. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
If you had the PortageQOS you would see what change slowed down |
| 17 |
Portage. And the problem could have already been fixed. |
| 18 |
You could make fast and correct decisions. True, it could be possible |
| 19 |
that some parts of the portage need to be rewritten. May be Python was |
| 20 |
the wrong decision, may be it's better to use C++. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
(Yes, I expect to be |
| 23 |
condemned over here before I'm banned, a sacrifice for the better Gentoo |
| 24 |
somebody had to make). |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Do you remember how many problems portage had with Python? It's like |
| 27 |
Gentoo is for Python not for anything else. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Why not to get rid of Python at all. What is so great in Python that |
| 30 |
Gentoo exists for the sake of it? |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
And when next thing is introduced - you can see how it works |
| 33 |
world wide. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
On some older PC the new portage works for 4-6 minutes before it FAILS. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
If the portage is going to be a little bit smarter again - you would need a |
| 38 |
new hardware to run it. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
And nobody cares, of course it's better to hide don't know or run from |
| 41 |
problems than know about them and fix them. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
300 devs, are NOT ABLE to make portage fast in 8 years. |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
-- |
| 46 |
Best regards, |
| 47 |
Igor mailto:lanthruster@×××××.com |
Archives