Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Jason Stubbs <jstubbs@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage ebuild cruft
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 13:58:13
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage ebuild cruft by Jason Wever
1 On Friday 29 April 2005 22:29, Jason Wever wrote:
2 > On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, Athul Acharya wrote:
3 > >> Purging old versions for a few seconds speed increase in portage [snip]
4 > >
5 > > Few seconds? Try few miliseconds, if anything, at all, ever. The
6 > > original email in this thread gave me the best laugh I've had in a
7 > > while, until I realized it came from a dev; then I was very sad.
8 >
9 > Please don't assume everyone is running your latest and greatest PC
10 > hardware, or processors that measure in the GHz, regardless of
11 > architecture. We have officially supported architectures where a few
12 > seconds may be a generous statement of the delay (low end SPARC64 systems
13 > for instance). The initialization delay of portage is very much felt
14 > here, either via emerge or other tools like equery.
16 The initialization time of portage is directly related to the number of
17 packages installed. Cutting out excess ebuilds from the tree won't speed this
18 up at all. Cutting out excess ebuilds won't have much effect on the general
19 running of emerge at all, actually, except for updating the cache after
20 syncing.
22 Regards,
23 Jason Stubbs


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage ebuild cruft Jason Wever <weeve@g.o>