1 |
On 10/11/05, Bastian Balthazar Bux <BastianBalthazarBux@×××××××××.it> wrote: |
2 |
> Mark Knecht ha scritto: |
3 |
> > Hi, |
4 |
> > It seems that over the last few months that the 'Updating portage |
5 |
> > cache' part of an emerge sync has gotten very, very low on my |
6 |
> > machines. Has anything changed that should have caused this? Did I |
7 |
> > possibly miss some update step somewhere to make this run faster. |
8 |
> > |
9 |
> > I'd say that this step is now taking at least 10 minutes - maybe 15 |
10 |
> > minutes. Good reason not to update too often! |
11 |
> > |
12 |
> > I do think the speed at which emerge gets to this point is a bit |
13 |
> > faster, and certainly I'd expect it to slow down a bit as the library |
14 |
> > grows ever larger. I see no change at all in emerging a package - only |
15 |
> > the sync step. |
16 |
> > |
17 |
> > Thanks in advance for any info. |
18 |
> > |
19 |
> > Cheers, |
20 |
> > Mark |
21 |
> > |
22 |
> maybe this can interest you |
23 |
> "Cache rewrite backport" |
24 |
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.portage.devel/1105 |
25 |
> -- |
26 |
> gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
27 |
|
28 |
Interesting, but very new as I see it. Scary. |
29 |
|
30 |
thanks, |
31 |
Mark |
32 |
|
33 |
-- |
34 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |