| 1 |
On Monday 09 January 2006 04:37, Stroller wrote: |
| 2 |
> > aaahhh, the wait for eupdatedb, yes it does take a while (certainly |
| 3 |
> > not |
| 4 |
> > 90 minutes, more like 5 minutes for me) but then I run it from cron at |
| 5 |
> > lunch, so I don't notice... much :) |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> I think you meant to say: |
| 8 |
> aaahhh, the wait for eupdatedb, yes it does take a while |
| 9 |
> (certainly not |
| 10 |
> 90 minutes for me, more like 5 minutes) |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> I have no intention of timing it here and now, but I have one system |
| 13 |
> here on which eupdatedb is certainly into the several tens of minutes. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
You know, you could all just use: |
| 16 |
http://gentoo-wiki.com/TIP_speed_up_portage_with_cdb |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Then get ultra fast metadata updates (no 50-51% hang*), quick searches (not as |
| 19 |
quick as eix or esearch but *way* quicker than portage standard), and no need |
| 20 |
to update a second database (so no out of date searches). |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
carpaskis thoughts are perfectly valid, but if you know you're using cdb then |
| 24 |
get a seg fault, you can turn it off. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
* Under 52 seconds, with no previous portage interactions in hours, while |
| 28 |
reading email in kmail, on a 7200rpm 2.5" drive in a PM 1.8. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
Mike Williams |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives