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 (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j3TDwD16011659 for ; Fri, 29 Apr 2005 13:58:13 GMT Received: from p061204002031.ppp.prin.ne.jp ([61.204.2.31] helo=linux.box) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.43) id 1DRW0W-0003q6-Vh for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 29 Apr 2005 13:58:18 +0000 Received: by linux.box (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B619546BCB; Fri, 29 Apr 2005 22:58:13 +0900 (JST) From: Jason Stubbs To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage ebuild cruft Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 22:58:10 +0900 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 References: <200504281840.23788.lanius@gentoo.org> <5a67a16f050428161738959aa1@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: 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@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1358738.plAQaVHRAZ"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200504292258.13394.jstubbs@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 09e0d91e-22f7-4493-a2d4-09c831612b02 X-Archives-Hash: f46a2ef8cc41e4370080f251002f38b6 --nextPart1358738.plAQaVHRAZ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Friday 29 April 2005 22:29, Jason Wever wrote: > On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, Athul Acharya wrote: > >> Purging old versions for a few seconds speed increase in portage [snip] > > > > Few seconds? Try few miliseconds, if anything, at all, ever. The > > original email in this thread gave me the best laugh I've had in a > > while, until I realized it came from a dev; then I was very sad. > > Please don't assume everyone is running your latest and greatest PC > hardware, or processors that measure in the GHz, regardless of > architecture. We have officially supported architectures where a few > seconds may be a generous statement of the delay (low end SPARC64 systems > for instance). The initialization delay of portage is very much felt > here, either via emerge or other tools like equery. The initialization time of portage is directly related to the number of=20 packages installed. Cutting out excess ebuilds from the tree won't speed th= is=20 up at all. Cutting out excess ebuilds won't have much effect on the general= =20 running of emerge at all, actually, except for updating the cache after=20 syncing. Regards, Jason Stubbs --nextPart1358738.plAQaVHRAZ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBCcj11xvWNPsk/ZP4RAjxVAJ96LckhFOV/28VKpzAcY5KtRbfXWwCeKLew vpct5QjjRqY6CwDFf2S4FlE= =zDu5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1358738.plAQaVHRAZ-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list