From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 691B4138350 for ; Wed, 22 Apr 2020 17:34:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EBAE2E1035; Wed, 22 Apr 2020 17:34:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8564AE100E for ; Wed, 22 Apr 2020 17:34:50 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead? To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org References: <20200421165803.GB187193@redacted> <11506562.O9o76ZdvQC@peak> <20200421190145.GF187193@redacted> <0d270fdf-1de2-03b4-1f5a-702450975561@gmail.com> From: Michael Orlitzky Message-ID: <2b6a7f82-b4c2-2115-e4e5-2ec27482a4c9@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2020 13:34:46 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.6.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <0d270fdf-1de2-03b4-1f5a-702450975561@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: bfdfeb84-8c3b-48cc-95a8-cd22adaf61d1 X-Archives-Hash: b32bcfcc86cc4e8865ffbda424cdcfe9 On 4/22/20 1:29 PM, Dale wrote: > > Some may recall my thread about emerge only using one core when doing > it's build list.  As was discussed in that thread, it would be really > difficult to build that list in pretty much any language because it just > isn't set up to do that, the tree itself it seems.  While I'd like > emerge to be able to use more than one core, it may be faster but it > might also fall more often to which would waste more time than using > multiple cores would save.  In other words, a lot of work with little or > no benefit. > Dependency resolution is indeed a (formally) hard problem. Solving the traveling salesman problem is also hard. Solving the traveling salesman problem while being punched in the face is even harder. When I complain about portage being slow, what I mean is that I want to stop being punched in the face so that I can concentrate all of my energy on the underlying hard problem.