Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] portage-ng concurse entry Was: Updated Portage project page

[Daniel Robbins <drobbins@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1232 bytes --]

On Sat, 2003-12-06 at 07:26, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> We need indeed a highlevel abstraction, and dep trackers are one of the 
> modules. I think that access to the package tree is another, where caching 
> can be modular too.

If by "caching" you mean the metadata cache, this is something I want to
eliminate in portage-ng. I would like things to be designed to be fast
from the start, with no slow bash<->python linkage like there is in the
current portage that makes us require a metadata cache for decent
performance.

It should be possible to get portage-ng without caching running as fast
as portage does now when it has a fully up-to-date cache. Then if we
need more performance, portage-ng's datastore can be moved to a
database, or we can add an enhanced caching mode to make it even faster.

For backwards compatibility with existing ebuilds, yes we will probably
still need the metadata cache since we'll still have some kind of bash
linkage. It's important to point out that the design of portage-ng will
not be tied to ebuilds. Ebuilds will likely become "legacy" build
scripts that are superceded by something a lot better, cleaner, powerful
and also faster for portage-ng.

Regards,

Daniel

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]