Gentoo Archives: gentoo-pms

From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>
To: gentoo-pms@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-pms] Variancy?
Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2010 22:07:40
Message-Id: 20101205220627.64452d13@snowcone
In Reply to: [gentoo-pms] Variancy? by Ulrich Mueller
1 On Sun, 5 Dec 2010 22:55:50 +0100
2 Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote:
3 > I don't understand the following passage from section "The state of
4 > the system between functions":
5
6 That whole section was written before Portage got parallel jobs
7 support, and was based around what ebuilds were actually doing.
8 Portage's parallel jobs break those rules, and this has caused all
9 kinds of weirdness.
10
11 The implications are *supposed* to be that if you want to do parallel
12 builds, you build binary packages in parallel (being sure to only run
13 one lot of pkg_ functions at once), and then install those binary
14 packages (the usual way, so rerunning pkg_setup) serially.
15
16 Instead, Portage just installs directly, and has a whole load of
17 convoluted hacks to try to avoid breakage. These don't actually work,
18 but the bugs are hidden often enough that you can often go for quite a
19 long time before you end up screwing your system up... In particular,
20 Portage assumes that if a and b aren't in any way dependent upon each
21 other, then they're not going to do anything to / that's going to break
22 the other one, which isn't true.
23
24 --
25 Ciaran McCreesh

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-pms] Variancy? Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o>