| 1 |
Jesse Guardiani wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Hello, |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> First off, sorry if this isn't the right place! |
| 6 |
> I didn't see anything more appropriate though, except |
| 7 |
> perhaps Portage-dev, but I'm not a developer. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> I'm a FreeBSD user switching to Gentoo for my home |
| 10 |
> system. Linux 2.6 is a LOT more stable than any |
| 11 |
> FreeBSD 5.x-RELEASE kernels right now, and Linux |
| 12 |
> has much better support for Wine and such. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> One of the most obvious differences between FreeBSD |
| 15 |
> ports and Gentoo Portage is how LONG it takes to |
| 16 |
> search for ports/packages with Portage. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> I have 525 ports installed on my FreeBSD laptop right |
| 19 |
> now, and probably only half of that installed on the |
| 20 |
> Gentoo machine, but the gentoo machine crunches a lot |
| 21 |
> more doing a --search than the FreeBSD machine does |
| 22 |
> with a pkg_version -vs 'name'. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> And forget about --searchdesc! That takes ages! |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> Is portage not hash indexed or something? |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
The BIG hitch in portage is the database strategy....it's file system based. |
| 30 |
Basicly it's thousands of small text files... you want to update the |
| 31 |
database?.... open, read, close over and over again.... |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
It sucks. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Portage is crying for an sql database backend... mysql, sqllite, mmsql... |
| 36 |
anything would be nice. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Tell us more about your bsd ports, it sounds interesting... |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
-- |
| 46 |
gentoo-performance@g.o mailing list |
Archives