1 |
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Michael Seifert |
2 |
<michael.seifert@×××.net> wrote: |
3 |
> Am 23.03.2011 11:12, schrieb Fabian Groffen: |
4 |
>> How much do you lose to fetch the ebuilds you need eventually? |
5 |
> |
6 |
> I cannot tell you at this stage, sorry. The real loss for steps 3/4 has |
7 |
> to be measured after the implementation. The problem with the estimates |
8 |
> here is that the assembled ebuilds also contain the sources and the |
9 |
> eclasses. Maybe I will do some number crunching on a few selected ebuilds. |
10 |
> |
11 |
|
12 |
A more critical factor could be the dependencies - unless we otherwise |
13 |
cache them. To install a package you need to walk the dependency tree |
14 |
(well, at least until you hit installed packages with the right USE |
15 |
flags). That requires one set of fetches for each level you traverse, |
16 |
and that means at least one round trip per level. |
17 |
|
18 |
Is this a solution in search of a problem? It seems like there are a |
19 |
lot of tradeoffs with an approach like this. If space or compression |
20 |
CPU, etc is the real issue, would it make more sense to just gzip all |
21 |
the ebuilds or something? |
22 |
|
23 |
Rich |