Gentoo Archives: gentoo-scm

From: "Robin H. Johnson" <robbat2@g.o>
To: gentoo-scm@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-scm] Status report, 2009/04/10
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 22:02:53
Message-Id: 20090411220247.GC23644@curie-int
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-scm] Status report, 2009/04/10 by Mike Auty
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 10:30:14PM +0100, Mike Auty wrote:
> Great work on the pushing on with all this, thanks very much, it's > greatly appreciated! 5:) It's excellent you managed to get some of the > git guys in on the thread and offering such useful patches, it looks > like things are getting better and better for having the gentoo repo > working great in git.
Latest report from that upstream thread is initial memory reductions of of 18-21% depending on the repository, with a runtime variance of -6 to +2%. The Gentoo repo took 6% less time, but the linux-kernel repo took 2% longer. Linus and co are exploring that now, just to make sure they didn't introduce any bugs.
> I was wondering how your Thin Manifest stuff was getting on? I figured > since you're doing all this, I'd offer my meagre python skills for > anything that might need coding up for that (I've always meant to start > tinkering with portage anyway, just never quite got round to it). So > please let me know if you've any documentation or anything that needs > looking over, or any basic tools that need putting in place, and I'll > see what I can do (time and skill permitting obviously)... 5:)
Maciej started the best discussion on that, in Message-ID 200902160805.55088.reavertm@××××××.fm. Think we managed to flesh out all of a specification there, but I don't think anybody has started development yet. The development side would probably tie in quite well with unfinished GLEP60. -- 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