Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage performance dropped considerably
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 19:55:51
Message-Id: 52E56837.3020407@gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage performance dropped considerably by Volker Armin Hemmann
1 On 26/01/2014 21:28, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
2 >> So I dunno, it's annoying to have to wait, but it also prevents a lot of
3 >> > wasted time by doing what software can do so well - detecting dependency
4 >> > issues.
5 >> >
6 >> >
7 >> >
8 > I disagree with you here. You still get a lot of unresolved blockers and
9 > other problems you have to deal with manually AND portage is unbearable
10 > slow now.
11
12 I don't see that here. Maybe I'm lucky, maybe every time I my config
13 deviate from as-shipped I hit the sweet spot. The only blockers I've
14 gotten from portage for months now has been incompatible USE flags
15 (totally not portage's fault).
16
17
18 > It never was really fast - back in the day pkgcore run cycles around it,
19 > too bad it has died a slow death.
20
21
22 Hey, I never said portage was perfect or even fast :-)
23
24 I only said that for a given input I get the output I expect in a
25 timeframe that isn't intolerable. The process block in the middle is
26 exactly that - a black box that may be contain a pig's breakfast
27
28
29 > Now you get a really slow portage, making updates an horrendous
30 > experience plus most of the same old breakage.
31
32 Again, I think I'm just lucky. All my old slow machines and VMs run a
33 very lean Gentoo. It's only this laptop with i7, 16G and a new shiny SSD
34 that is loaded up with heaps of stuff. If portage is unbearably slow,
35 then that hardware is hiding it from me.
36
37
38
39 --
40 Alan McKinnon
41 alan.mckinnon@×××××.com

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage performance dropped considerably Helmut Jarausch <jarausch@××××××××××××××××.de>