| 1 |
On Tue, 5 May 2009 16:32:39 -0400 |
| 2 |
Simon <turner25@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> > Storage space comes pretty cheap these days, so prehaps it's just |
| 5 |
> > easier to get dirt-cheap 80G harddisk and build (and keep) all the |
| 6 |
> > packages from sum of the worlds on it in a dedicated chroot or VM? |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Well, i'm keeping all packages currently, and diskspace is cheap for |
| 9 |
> home computers, but not on this binary cruncher... =( |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
... |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> > sshfs (prehaps with something like funionfs if you keep local packages |
| 14 |
> > too) should be enough to mount generated packages to any host and deploy |
| 15 |
> > them. |
| 16 |
> > |
| 17 |
> > To avoid unnecessary syncing of portage trees (even with one local |
| 18 |
> > server) you can just mount it when needed, along with the packages, |
| 19 |
> > since it doesn't need write access anyway. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> Well i used to use sshfs to mount the "binpkg repository's |
| 22 |
> /usr/portage"... but running a basic `emerge -k -vp -uDN world` would |
| 23 |
> take days, the -k was the problem. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> So, i now sync the /usr/portage from my host to one of my PC, then |
| 26 |
> sync from that PC to the others locally. Then i emerge. |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> Also, i dont fully like having my packages remote, i like to be |
| 29 |
> independant... so NFS and others may be a neat solution, but brings a |
| 30 |
> lot of limitations in my situation. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
That explains a lot. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Now the idea seem reasonable to me, as long as by union you mean local |
| 35 |
(toolchain plus some stuff) root on top of remote, so only few |
| 36 |
dependencies' (not present in root overlay) headers and remote |
| 37 |
/var/db/pkg entries would be actually transferred over the |
| 38 |
network connection, not the whole root. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
-- |
| 41 |
Mike Kazantsev // fraggod.net |
Archives