| 1 |
On 13:50 Wed 18 Feb , Robin H. Johnson wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 01:24:20PM -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
| 3 |
> > What are some other options? We could have a manifest directory instead, |
| 4 |
> > with 1 file inside per distfile. |
| 5 |
> Please no. The space savings that came from using a single Manifest |
| 6 |
> rather than the split digests per ebuild were significant. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Yeah, I know it's an unrealistic idea. Just trying to spout some off to |
| 9 |
try and spur better ones. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> If you look at the existing Manifests, there are 4 entry types: |
| 12 |
> AUX |
| 13 |
> EBUILD |
| 14 |
> DIST |
| 15 |
> MISC |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> DIST is the only one that needs something outside the directory to |
| 18 |
> generate. It's also the most time-consuming to generate. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Using the converse, all files covered by AUX, DIST, MISC have GIT SHA1 |
| 21 |
> commit ids. Explicitly performing a checksum on them is not needed, just |
| 22 |
> extract it from Git. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> A distfile-only Manifest should merge extremely well, as it will seldom |
| 25 |
> have conflicts. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
I'd considered only the distfiles in manifests. There will still be a |
| 28 |
conflict every time there is a newer version in one branch (say an |
| 29 |
overlay, where the files are copied directly across and one bump is |
| 30 |
made) and older versions are deleted in the other branch (during a |
| 31 |
typical tree cleanup), right? |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
Thanks, |
| 35 |
Donnie |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
Donnie Berkholz |
| 38 |
Developer, Gentoo Linux |
| 39 |
Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com |
Archives