1 |
Ok, i think i have reasonable amount of information to start something |
2 |
now :) As a last question -- what i do after some additions to |
3 |
portage? Send it where? |
4 |
|
5 |
2006/3/14, tvali <qtvali@×××××.com>: |
6 |
> 2006/3/14, solar <solar@g.o>: |
7 |
> > On Tue, 2006-03-14 at 15:50 +0200, Marius Mauch wrote: |
8 |
> > > Heh, make the dep resolver even more complex ;) |
9 |
> > > Also don't really see a need for such a feature, pretty much no benefit |
10 |
> > > with a lot of additional complexity. |
11 |
> > |
12 |
> > agreed. |
13 |
> |
14 |
> Ok, but if making it layered (several "layers" or passes). To explain |
15 |
> my thought about how they should be sorted: |
16 |
> |
17 |
> Layer 1 would calculate real dependencies of packages -- using current |
18 |
> use flags. Those dependencies would also be saved into portage tree |
19 |
> after calculating (--newuse would update them). |
20 |
> |
21 |
> Layer 2 would be used to make a list of all packages, which would be |
22 |
> installed right now -- this happens when some emerge or pretend is |
23 |
> being done. |
24 |
> |
25 |
> Layer 3 would only use those calculated dependencies and |
26 |
> ready-selected list of packages and sort them. |
27 |
> |
28 |
> One possible sort would look like that: |
29 |
> |
30 |
> * Packages, which have given importance, will have this importance |
31 |
> forever -- it will be written to world. |
32 |
> * When sorting packages, only those, which are directly in world, will |
33 |
> be considered -- dependancies are installed as late as possible. |
34 |
> |
35 |
> It should be enough: |
36 |
> 1. Make list |
37 |
> 2. Add all packages, starting with those, which have higher priority |
38 |
> 3. Add their dependencies, trying to put any of them right before the |
39 |
> first package, which needs them (more advanced sorting would use also |
40 |
> default priorities of dependancies -- putting them before first |
41 |
> package, which needs them, and after last package, which has bigger |
42 |
> importance than this first package) |
43 |
> |
44 |
> Any other sort optimizations would be unnessecary as user can just use |
45 |
> right priority numbers to get everything ok with this type of sorting. |
46 |
> |
47 |
> Sorting is good especially when user makes a long list of packages and |
48 |
> then starts to emerge them at once. |
49 |
> |
50 |
> In my case i did install gentoo only at daytime, having my computer |
51 |
> off at nights (as i dont like it's sound in my room when i sleep). It |
52 |
> took several days -- and i started to use it right after getting it |
53 |
> up; i started also using kde right after it included kicker, konqueror |
54 |
> and konsole. I wanted to install graphics, toys and other such things |
55 |
> as last thing. And i didnt want to make pauses between emerges, but |
56 |
> had, because i wasnt always there, when one emerge was finished (as |
57 |
> they took hours). |
58 |
> |
59 |
> -- |
60 |
> tvali |
61 |
> (e-mail: "qtvali@×××××.com"; msn: "qtvali@×××××.com"; |
62 |
> icq: "317-492-912") |
63 |
> |
64 |
> Ühe eesti internetifirma lehel kohtasin tsitaati: |
65 |
> If you don't do it excellently, dont do it at all. Because if it's not |
66 |
> excellent, it won't be profitable or fun, and if you're not in |
67 |
> business for fun or profit, what the hell are you doing here? |
68 |
> Robert Townsend |
69 |
> |
70 |
|
71 |
|
72 |
-- |
73 |
tvali |
74 |
(e-mail: "qtvali@×××××.com"; msn: "qtvali@×××××.com"; |
75 |
icq: "317-492-912") |
76 |
|
77 |
Ühe eesti internetifirma lehel kohtasin tsitaati: |
78 |
If you don't do it excellently, dont do it at all. Because if it's not |
79 |
excellent, it won't be profitable or fun, and if you're not in |
80 |
business for fun or profit, what the hell are you doing here? |
81 |
Robert Townsend |
82 |
|
83 |
-- |
84 |
gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list |