Gentoo Archives: gentoo-scm

From: "Robin H. Johnson" <robbat2@g.o>
To: gentoo-scm@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-scm] gentoo-x86 on git - Manifests
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 22:00:00
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-scm] gentoo-x86 on git - Manifests by Donnie Berkholz
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 01:24:20PM -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> What are some other options? We could have a manifest directory instead, > with 1 file inside per distfile.
Please no. The space savings that came from using a single Manifest rather than the split digests per ebuild were significant.
> > Hence the question - is it possible to *not* store and .gitignore Manifests is > > git controlled portage repository? > > As portage metadata is regenerated, maybe it would be as well possible to > > regenerate manifests on server? > > I guess it would be possible but ineffective as it would require all needed > > distfiles to be present as well and this is unacceptable.
The problem just needs solving from a different angle. If you look at the existing Manifests, there are 4 entry types: AUX EBUILD DIST MISC DIST is the only one that needs something outside the directory to generate. It's also the most time-consuming to generate. Using the converse, all files covered by AUX, DIST, MISC have GIT SHA1 commit ids. Explicitly performing a checksum on them is not needed, just extract it from Git. A distfile-only Manifest should merge extremely well, as it will seldom have conflicts. When it comes to generating the outgoing Manifests for users on the central server, it's pretty simple. The only downside I see is the potential for a degree of lesser security for anybody using the Git repo directly instead of rsync. -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux Developer & Infra Guy E-Mail : robbat2@g.o GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-scm] gentoo-x86 on git - Manifests Robert Buchholz <rbu@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-scm] gentoo-x86 on git - Manifests Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o>