| 1 |
On Mon, 2005-12-05 at 23:06 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Okay, new suggestion. |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> Postpone the cache rewrite from above. Have only the minimal mods necessary to |
| 6 |
> fix the PORT_LOGDIR/tee bug. Include the other two as is. That would be |
| 7 |
> 2.0.54 as per the attached patch. Get that out soon and get trunk out masked |
| 8 |
> at around the same time. As soon as 2.0.54 goes stable put trunk into ~arch. |
| 9 |
> However, instead of ~arch meaning "regression fixes only" we could just limit |
| 10 |
> it to "minor changes only" (ie. no big refactorings, rewrites or similar high |
| 11 |
> risk changes) until it is time to stable it. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
I think it would be wise to reconsider the cache fixes. I know you have |
| 14 |
been away from irc for a while now and have missed the daily events, |
| 15 |
but most of the people we have interacted with are expecting the cache |
| 16 |
updates in .54 (alot of people complaining about the hanging at 50%) |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
The code has been pretty well tested and seems safe on the surface. I |
| 19 |
think ferringb's testing has shown that the cache updates use about 14M |
| 20 |
of ram where the existing code (as of .52.x) uses about 80M of ram. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives