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 j4QNGgQT021676 for ; Thu, 26 May 2005 23:16:44 GMT Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DbRWJ-0003jC-V1 for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 26 May 2005 23:12:08 +0000 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1DbRTI-00052b-QM for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Fri, 27 May 2005 01:09:00 +0200 Received: from ip68-230-66-193.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.230.66.193]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 27 May 2005 01:09:00 +0200 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-230-66-193.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 27 May 2005 01:09:00 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: baselayout-1.11.12-r2 request for testers Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 16:09:59 -0700 Organization: Sometimes Message-ID: References: <200505251820.02637.vapier@gentoo.org> <1117110163.21483.11.camel@uberlaptop.ubernet> 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: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-230-66-193.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.14.2.91 (As She Crawled Across the Table) Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: f78dbd5b-10df-4a01-b387-f37b71010ae8 X-Archives-Hash: 15fe29ca1ed96986db2175f30cfc2af0 Roy Marples posted <1117110163.21483.11.camel@uberlaptop.ubernet>, excerpted below, on Thu, 26 May 2005 13:22:43 +0100: > On Thu, 2005-05-26 at 02:08 -0700, Duncan wrote: >> Hmm.. I /did/ have issues with parallel startup a couple revisions >> back. I had disabled that and haven't reenabled it yet. I suppose I >> should do that and bug it now, if it still fails. It /was/ working at >> one point. > > There may still be issues with parallel startup. It doesn't really startup > in parallel and it's not much faster, so if any bugs do come up then we'll > probably recommend turning it off. > > baselayout-1.12.0-alpha3 will have much improved parallel startup thanks > to Paul Pacheco patch (bug #69854) which is essentially a re-write of the > code so we're not that interested in fixing parallel startup in > baselayout-1.11.x at this time. OK, cool! Gives me an excuse to not worry about it for a bit longer. (I had found pretty much exactly what you mentioned, that it wasn't much faster anyway, the reason I hadn't squawked when it failed and I had to turn it off.) That's good, since I read I have new KDE to worry about next week, and I've a couple things to trace b4 then (unsermake doesn't seem to be engaging, here, for some reason, and it'd be real nice if I could figure out how to get the old configcache patch working (locally, anyway) again with the split sandbox, since the portage upgrade with that integrated doesn't seem to be on the immediate horizon.) -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman in http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list