From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j26KPJKw005398 for ; Sun, 6 Mar 2005 20:25:19 GMT Received: from merlin by smtp.gentoo.org with local (Exim 4.42) id 1D82JR-0002gq-HA for gentoo-dev@robin.gentoo.org; Sun, 06 Mar 2005 20:25:17 +0000 Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 20:25:17 +0000 From: Cory Visi To: gentoo-dev@robin.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Large files still in files/ Message-ID: <20050306202517.GA30996@toucan.gentoo.org> References: <20050206.052901.4667@leftmind.net> <20050306131024.Q29561@leftmind.net> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050306131024.Q29561@leftmind.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i X-Archives-Salt: 26f140c7-2b21-4c52-89f2-d4061b7fc6a9 X-Archives-Hash: f8bd3fee81b60c4ecffa2569c3ba99c5 On Sun, Mar 06, 2005 at 01:10:24PM -0500, Anthony de Boer wrote: > Mark Loeser wrote: > > There's also quite a large amount of binary files still in the tree. A > > lot of them seem to be compressed patches. I'm not sure what should be > > done with those, but I thought putting binary files into the tree was > > discouraged unless absolutely necessary. Lots of 4k compressed patches > > doesn't seem to be something absolutely necessary. > > Tying this to the Portage-tree collection-copyright issue, it might be a > good idea for all third-party-sourced patches, with e-mail headers or > other such authorship/source/copyright information still intact at the > start (and happily skipped by the patch command), to be gzipped and put > in distfiles, and the tree itself to be reserved for stuff written > specifically for the Gentoo project. > > This does still leave large Gentoo-supplied patches in question; I'm > uncomfortable with the idea of us getting *that* far from the upstream > sources, though. I kind of like this idea, however, I think it's idealistic. Patches need to be modified very frequently. Especially when we combine multiple patches and make them all work with USE flags. A great deal of our patches really are written specifically work with our ebuilds. What is the real percentage of space usage from compressed or uncompressed patches? How big of a problem is it? -Cory -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list