| 1 |
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 1:41 PM, Arun Raghavan <arunissatan@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 1 June 2010 12:40, Priit Laes <plaes@×××××.org> wrote: |
| 3 |
> [...] |
| 4 |
>> Anyway, I'll leave this idea simmering here for a while and unless |
| 5 |
>> someone comes up with a better idea (Yes, I have also thought about |
| 6 |
>> scanning whole portage tree every x-hours), I'm going to implement the |
| 7 |
>> daemon. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> My 2p - I don't see a major advantage of a monitoring daemon over a |
| 10 |
> periodic full-scan, or caching the mtimes. IMO that the latter options |
| 11 |
> are better on the grounds that you're not introducing an additional |
| 12 |
> entity (Occam's Razor, KISS, etc. etc.), and afaics there is no |
| 13 |
> significant gain of the daemon - inotify watches are not going to |
| 14 |
> imply immediate updates since your tree updates will be periodic |
| 15 |
> anyway. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
I agree with Arun here, you can easily schedule the server to run the |
| 19 |
grumpy update whenever an eix-sync (or cvs up) is done. No point |
| 20 |
running a monitoring daemon when you know exactly when something will |
| 21 |
be updated. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
~Nirbheek Chauhan |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team |
Archives