Gentoo Archives: gentoo-portage-dev

From: Brian Harring <ferringb@g.o>
To: gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] chunking up portage
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 08:27:10
Message-Id: 20051216082602.GA30053@nightcrawler.e-centre.net
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] chunking up portage by Marius Mauch
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

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] chunking up portage Marius Mauch <genone@g.o>