Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Alec Warner <antarus@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal to undeprecate EGO_SUM
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2022 19:49:20
Message-Id: CAAr7Pr8y1wYhhto98+CT1w9fxr3bUhBrfLMSWqEFx2AyKGGXJA@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal to undeprecate EGO_SUM by Florian Schmaus
1 On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 7:53 AM Florian Schmaus <flow@g.o> wrote:
2 >
3 > On 30/09/2022 02.36, William Hubbs wrote:
4 > > On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 06:31:39PM +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
5 > >>>>>>> On Wed, 28 Sep 2022, Florian Schmaus wrote:
6 > >>> 2.) the number of EGO_SUM entries exceeds 1000 and a Gentoo developer
7 > >>> maintains the package
8 > >>> 3.) the number of EGO_SUM entries exceeds 1500 and a proxied
9 > >>> maintainer maintains the package
10 > >>
11 > >> These numbers seem quite large, compared to the mean number of 3.4
12 > >> distfiles for packages in the Gentoo repository. (The median and the
13 > >> 99-percentile are 1 and 22, respectively.)
14 >
15 > The numbers may appear large when compared to the whole tree, but I
16 > think a fair comparison would be within the related programming language
17 > ecosystem, e.g., Golang or Rust.
18 >
19 > For example, analyzing ::gentoo yields the following histogram for
20 > 2022-01-01:
21 > https://dev.gentoo.org/~flow/ego_sum_entries_histogram-2020-01-01.png
22 >
23 >
24 > > To stay with your example, restic has a 300k manifest, multiple 30k+
25 > > ebuilds and897 distfiles.
26 > >
27 > > I'm thinking the limit would have to be much lower. Say, around 256
28 > > entries in EGO_SUM_SRC_URI.
29 >
30 > A limit of 256 appears to be to low to be of any use. It is slightly
31 > above the 50th percentile, half of the packages could not use it.
32 >
33 > We have to realize that programming language ecosystems that only build
34 > static binaries tend to produce software projects that have a large
35 > number of dependencies. For example, app-misc/broot, a tool written in
36 > Rust, has currently 310 entries in its Manifest. Why should we threat
37 > one programming language different from another? Will be see voices that
38 > ask for banning Rust packages in ::gentoo in the future? With the rising
39 > popularity of Golang and Rust, we will (hopefully) only ever see an
40 > increase of such packages in ::gentoo. And most existing packages in
41 > this category will at best keep their dependency count constant, but are
42 > also likely to accumulate further dependencies over time.
43 >
44 > And quite frankly, I don't see a problem with "large" Manifests and/or
45 > ebuilds. Yes, it means our FTPs are hosting many files, in some cases
46 > even many small files. And yes, it means that in some cases ebuild
47 > parsing takes a bit longer. But I spoke with a few developers in the
48 > past few months and was not presented with any real world issues that
49 > EGO_SUM caused. If someone wants to fill in here, then now is a good
50 > time to speak up. But my impression is that the arguments against
51 > EGO_SUM are mostly of cosmetic nature. Again, please correct me if I am
52 > wrong.
53
54 I thought the problem was that EGO_SUM ends up in SRC_URI, which ends
55 up in A. A ends up in the environment, and then exec() fails with
56 E2BIG because there is an imposed limit on environment variables (and
57 also command line argument length.)
58
59 Did this get fixed?
60
61 https://bugs.gentoo.org/719202
62
63 >
64 > - Flow

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal to undeprecate EGO_SUM William Hubbs <williamh@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal to undeprecate EGO_SUM Florian Schmaus <flow@g.o>