Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: hasufell <hasufell@g.o>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Cc: qa@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Portage performance dropped considerably
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 14:44:56
Message-Id: 52E51F5D.1000907@gentoo.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-user] Portage performance dropped considerably by Nikos Chantziaras
1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
2 Hash: SHA1
3
4 On 01/26/2014 03:35 PM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
5 > Anyone else noticed this yet? Some portage update seems to have
6 > made "emerge -uDN @world" perform about 10 times slower than
7 > before. It used to take seconds, now it takes about 4 minutes only
8 > to tell me that there's nothing to update. And it does that every
9 > time, even directly in succession and with the caches warm.
10 >
11 > Is it just me?
12 >
13 >
14
15 Some people don't follow PMS when writing ebuilds which could be one
16 reason.
17
18 https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=174407
19 https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=487846
20 https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=393203
21 https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=486566
22 https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=434246
23 https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=311267
24
25 toolchain has closed all relevant bugs as WONTFIX so far and even QA
26 does not seem to care enough (?), although there are alternative
27 approaches to fix the lack of USE-dynamic SLOTS.
28 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
29 Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
30 Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
31
32 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJS5R9dAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWz6zkH/13KbO6s3d5GWe4yXJsL1C7G
33 xOx24vTwWkeEqmi7+kUxR5Y3LUmZ0Pl4E9n//q5KcgVouKtalwFmqNaVsxQSLG9h
34 VyRZgGNdvcvTYfdlch8VoiIhUiP+1ZaOsZFuHTOzzfw3qoc52LceJYSyV/lo/x/9
35 Qe6xT+TuTyUzRJunBFTEzsool8hEhu1UWPYfmjTbZ94wRgSuu68yuL/7hIr75sin
36 cjEWo25MGzXzf8IhgfM+nI37gurPX136aLuc+JGLTUnYqN9SC1Ad2wjtvHqWJ54O
37 /kfVlL0790v+l2HyV8CfBs3Z3LktaE7EOgEJBzogHhuO1tjDaoERYDGoE+30pK4=
38 =tCmP
39 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----