1 |
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 01:54:06PM +0200, Marius Mauch wrote: |
2 |
> Brian Harring wrote: |
3 |
> >So... thoughts? I'm not much for making portage depend on tarsync |
4 |
> >just for emerge-webrsync improvements, would rather chunk the bugger |
5 |
> >out. |
6 |
> |
7 |
> How about runtime detection? |
8 |
runtime detection is questionable from my standpoint, since while |
9 |
coding for it is good, without hard dep pulling it in the only folks |
10 |
who will ever have a faster emerge-webrsync are those who happen to |
11 |
know the hidden trick to merge tarsync. |
12 |
|
13 |
Originally, did runtime detection while I was _testing_ it- once |
14 |
things proved stable enough, made it a hard coded dep instead of an |
15 |
internal optimization it'll do if it finds the binary. |
16 |
|
17 |
With emerge-delta-webrsync, I could contact the folks who were using |
18 |
it about merging tarsync (plus I tagged it into the blog)- for |
19 |
emerge-webrsync, I don't think this is the route to go however. |
20 |
~harring |