From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C9CD138247 for ; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 12:30:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 997A4E0BF6; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 12:30:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-lb0-f172.google.com (mail-lb0-f172.google.com [209.85.217.172]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B59FE0BF2 for ; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 12:30:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lb0-f172.google.com with SMTP id x18so3333877lbi.17 for ; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 04:30:11 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:reply-to:message-id:to:subject:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=XKb+45hm3P14xnerA0I9aWv0UukPtria491dTNp8GKc=; b=CLKkskNpLq8RSPOYaw/r7hXEWnW9x4Nn2gFCzzRgvsLAViDk9WR3l0VzrvxpydZJ9g lw/PnqlqCoReOnBwBu9hwlBgN306bY6e06DaM2SNPzdI0AIDZyOpiDe1lgHXPGZiTlxg ifKG1M8YkPJaGxOHMWMZ0yaDVkax0dQoh+GOjDcBA7raO4xT6FWuwNR/CXA/5ijIM/XL lt6x+L1VE1m/imERWpOgqHoAJooMPvA8JTOCLE9i53YdmfyTRiFbb9iKFmaTS4OKJI4A oGLuBmSIJLEQZhpsSnp46bmt1bFsNO0jyU/zt0cLFDKF85TEJWbdFGj2MUzEjUrYThBv S+Yg== X-Received: by 10.112.52.74 with SMTP id r10mr3474535lbo.36.1389357011633; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 04:30:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.60.64] (office.healtech.ru. [89.208.21.2]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id a8sm4181277lae.5.2014.01.10.04.30.10 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 10 Jan 2014 04:30:10 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 16:30:04 +0400 From: Igor X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <52cfe7d2.0813980a.6b2c.ffff9681@mx.google.com> To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage QOS In-Reply-To: <86r48g8zdc.fsf@moguhome00.in.awa.tohoku.ac.jp> References: <52ce4eab.463f700a.4b43.16bd@mx.google.com> <52ce9994.24f5980a.0660.342e@mx.google.com> <6345949.JsNcU8lWSX@cschwan-laptop> <52cebfa2.aa78980a.7a02.42e5@mx.google.com> <86r48g8zdc.fsf@moguhome00.in.awa.tohoku.ac.jp> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 184a3037-45a8-42a7-9f9f-68608f62bd4c X-Archives-Hash: 83b17243ccd9f2540755ad9c0e476935 Hello Heroxbd, Friday, January 10, 2014, 4:16:47 AM, you wrote: >> The ebuilds have approximately the same time to install, the failure >> rate is about the same, emerge is getting slower. > I am curious about the slowness of emerge. > How about profile the portage and rewrite the time-crucial part in > C/C++, or ideally, borrowing the counterpart from paludis? How feasible > is that? > I guess the dep-tree calculation is the slowest part. And to think about it - Python is a slow big snake. And Gentoo is the fastest of penguins. So why do we send Gentoo for food riding on Python? If it were death we send Gentoo for then I would choose Python but food? Isn't it making them both slow and food isn't coming? -- Best regards, Igor mailto:lanthruster@gmail.com