1 |
Zac Medico wrote: |
2 |
> The way that I imagine the "cache sync" idea should be implemented |
3 |
> is like paludis's "unavailable repository" which uses of tarball to |
4 |
> distribute package metadata[1]. The tarball approach that they use |
5 |
> seems pretty reasonable. However, it would probably also be nice to |
6 |
> be able to use a protocol such as rsync to download the |
7 |
> metadata/cache/ directory from the same URI which is used to fetch |
8 |
> the ebuilds themselves (maybe paludis supports this already, I don't |
9 |
> know). |
10 |
|
11 |
You're offering two different ideas here, right? The "unavailable |
12 |
repository" method, and the method using the metadata/cache/ |
13 |
directory? |
14 |
|
15 |
If so, it makes sense to me to take the metadata/cache/ directory |
16 |
route, since, as you said, multiple repositories aren't yet supported |
17 |
in portage. At first I was thinking I could contact the guy who might |
18 |
be working on multiple repository support this summer and work with |
19 |
him to some extent... but the "unavaliable repository" solution would |
20 |
basically be dependent on/building off of multiple repository support, |
21 |
and it seems like building off of something that isn't fully built |
22 |
would be a bad idea. |
23 |
|
24 |
And to clarify: the goal of the project is to modify portage so that |
25 |
instead of fetching all of the ebuilds in the portage tree (or in an |
26 |
overlay) upon a sync, portage only fetches the metadata and cache info |
27 |
(via the metadata/cache/ directory) of the tree, and the ebuilds of |
28 |
packages that are already installed (packages found in the world |
29 |
file?) And then, additional ebuilds would be fetched only when they |
30 |
are needed? Or will only metadata/cache/ be fetched upon sync, and |
31 |
then all ebuilds will be fetched only when they are needed? Am I |
32 |
completely oversimplifying the project? |
33 |
|
34 |
Thanks so much for your help, |
35 |
Emma |
36 |
|
37 |
|
38 |
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 6:41 PM, Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> wrote: |
39 |
> |
40 |
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
41 |
> Hash: SHA1 |
42 |
> |
43 |
> Emma Strubell wrote: |
44 |
> > Hi all. |
45 |
> > |
46 |
> > So, I'd love to do Google's Summer of Code with you guys. I was perusing |
47 |
> > the list of ideas on the Gentoo wiki, and the "cache sync" idea seems |
48 |
> > pretty interesting, especially since it concerns the overall speed of |
49 |
> > portage, including search, which of course I've already started some |
50 |
> > work on. However, there is no contact person associated with that |
51 |
> > project! I figured I'd come here before going to #gentoo-soc to see if |
52 |
> > anyone is interested in mentoring me on this project, since it seemed |
53 |
> > like a few of you might be interested. |
54 |
> |
55 |
> The way that I imagine the "cache sync" idea should be implemented |
56 |
> is like paludis's "unavailable repository" which uses of tarball to |
57 |
> distribute package metadata[1]. The tarball approach that they use |
58 |
> seems pretty reasonable. However, it would probably also be nice to |
59 |
> be able to use a protocol such as rsync to download the |
60 |
> metadata/cache/ directory from the same URI which is used to fetch |
61 |
> the ebuilds themselves (maybe paludis supports this already, I don't |
62 |
> know). |
63 |
> |
64 |
> In order for the clients to be able to download the metadata/cache/ |
65 |
> directory, first that directory has to be populated (as is done on |
66 |
> gentoo's master rsync server). I'm currently working on a tool |
67 |
> called 'egencache' that overlay maintainers will be able to use in |
68 |
> order to populate the metadata/cache/ directory [2]. It will be |
69 |
> included in the next portage release. |
70 |
> |
71 |
> Before we implement something like "unavailable repository" for |
72 |
> portage, first we'll have to add multiple repository support, and |
73 |
> that's a decent sized project of it's own. Somebody has mentioned |
74 |
> interest in "multiple repository support" on the gentoo-soc list |
75 |
> [3], but they haven't submitted a proposal to |
76 |
> http://socghop.appspot.com yet. |
77 |
> |
78 |
> [1] http://paludis.pioto.org/configuration/repositories/unavailable.html |
79 |
> [2] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=261377 |
80 |
> [3] |
81 |
> http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-soc/msg_e383863a6748e367e13fe53b092f3908.xml |
82 |
> - -- |
83 |
> Thanks, |
84 |
> Zac |
85 |
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
86 |
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.11 (GNU/Linux) |
87 |
> |
88 |
> iEYEARECAAYFAknSnA4ACgkQ/ejvha5XGaO6tACgjzAsoXP0cJd0Vr1vJxU2CvLQ |
89 |
> JtwAn2Sj+GxLyyRpOIdbejPirCljmF2c |
90 |
> =k5u1 |
91 |
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
92 |
> |