Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: hasufell <hasufell@g.o>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage performance dropped considerably
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 23:35:35
Message-Id: 52E6ED3C.9030603@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage performance dropped considerably by Neil Bothwick
1 On 01/27/2014 11:57 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
2 > On Mon, 27 Jan 2014 22:54:28 +0100, hasufell wrote:
3 >
4 >>>> If it's about performance (in the sense of speed), then paludis
5 >>>> is worse, because dependency calculation is more complex/complete
6 >>>> there.
7 >>>
8 >>> That makes no sense at all. Paludis is written in a different
9 >>> language using different algorithms. It's not about the amount of
10 >>> work it does so much as how efficiently it does it.
11 >
12 >> That's exactly what I was saying. I was talking about speed, not
13 >> efficiency.
14 >
15 > But the efficiency of the algorithm, and the language, affects the speed.
16 > You can't presume "it does more, therefore it takes longer" if the two
17 > programs do things in very different ways.
18 >
19 >
20
21 For people who are used to portage, paludis will be _slower_ in total,
22 although the dependency calculation will be more accurate.

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage performance dropped considerably Neil Bothwick <neil@××××××××××.uk>