[gentoo-user] X11 monster rebuild forced? Can I defer it?

[gentoo-user] X11 monster rebuild forced? Can I defer it?

[Kevin O'Gorman]

A couple of days ago my usual emerge -aDvu world came up with a monster
list of blocked packages -- the switchover to modular x11 is apparently now
obligatory.  Or is it something I did to make it spill over?

In any event, the web page on the topic says it's best to shut down X
during this (unlike prior x11 upgrades).  I'd like to choose the time to take
my system down -- I rely on it.  My recent KDE rebuild took a bit over 36 hours
not counting a failure in the middle that required manual reordering of
emerges.  I suppose this one will be similar.

So: is there something simple I can do to make portage ignore this update
but allow unrelated ones to go through?  Then I'll probably do the upgrade
when I'm done teaching summer school.

++ kevin

-- 
Kevin O'Gorman, PhD
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] X11 monster rebuild forced? Can I defer it?

[Philipp Riegger]

Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
> A couple of days ago my usual emerge -aDvu world came up with a monster
> list of blocked packages -- the switchover to modular x11 is apparently now
> obligatory.  Or is it something I did to make it spill over?

It just went stable.

> In any event, the web page on the topic says it's best to shut down X
> during this (unlike prior x11 upgrades).  I'd like to choose the time to
> take
> my system down -- I rely on it.  My recent KDE rebuild took a bit over
> 36 hours
> not counting a failure in the middle that required manual reordering of
> emerges.  I suppose this one will be similar.

Emerging modular KDE akes as long as emerging the old big kde packages
(36 hours on your pc), emerging modular x should be faster than emerging
 old xorg-x11 (genlop -t xorg-x11), because just the neccessary drivers
and libs are built. Don't forget to read the modular x migration howto.

Philipp

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] X11 monster rebuild forced? Can I defer it?

[Alexander Skwar]

Philipp Riegger wrote:

> Emerging modular KDE akes as long as emerging the old big kde packages
> (36 hours on your pc),

Depends. With the split KDE packages, the system needs to md5 & unpack
those rather biggish .tar.bz2 files, like kdebase with ~23MB. If you've
only got a slow harddrive, as it is rather common on notebooks..., that
*WILL* take time.

So, overall, I'd guess it would be like 36 hours for the big kde packages
vs. maybe something like 37 hours for split ebuilds.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
 >   1. is qmail as secure as they say?

Depends on what they were saying, but most likely yes.
	-- Seen on debian-devel
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] X11 monster rebuild forced? Can I defer it?

[Bo Ørsted Andresen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 575 bytes --]

On Sunday 02 July 2006 16:25, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
> So: is there something simple I can do to make portage ignore this update
> but allow unrelated ones to go through?  Then I'll probably do the upgrade
> when I'm done teaching summer school.

Actually noone forces you to run `emerge -vuDa world` on a daily basis. It you 
run it with pretend and see something you wish to upgrade then just emerge 
that with --oneshot. But I think this would prevent it from showing up at 
all:

# echo >=xorg-base/xorg-x11-6.9 >> /etc/portage/package.mask

-- 
Bo Andresen

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] X11 monster rebuild forced? Can I defer it?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Sun, 2006-07-02 at 17:09 +0200, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> Philipp Riegger wrote:
> 
> > Emerging modular KDE akes as long as emerging the old big kde packages
> > (36 hours on your pc),
> 
> Depends. With the split KDE packages, the system needs to md5 & unpack
> those rather biggish .tar.bz2 files, like kdebase with ~23MB. If you've
> only got a slow harddrive, as it is rather common on notebooks..., that
> *WILL* take time.
> 
> So, overall, I'd guess it would be like 36 hours for the big kde packages
> vs. maybe something like 37 hours for split ebuilds.

I found the opposite effect with split ebuilds. Even with the
unpack/configure step, updating 100 splite packages out of 330+ was many
hours faster than compiling a huge monolithic everything in the past

alan

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] X11 monster rebuild forced? Can I defer it?

[Donnie Berkholz]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 352 bytes --]

Alan McKinnon wrote:
> I found the opposite effect with split ebuilds. Even with the
> unpack/configure step, updating 100 splite packages out of 330+ was many
> hours faster than compiling a huge monolithic everything in the past

BTW, if you install confcache and enable FEATURES=confcache, it will
speed things up a lot.

Thanks,
Donnie


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 252 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] X11 monster rebuild forced? Can I defer it?

[Dale]

Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Alan McKinnon wrote:
>   
>> I found the opposite effect with split ebuilds. Even with the
>> unpack/configure step, updating 100 splite packages out of 330+ was many
>> hours faster than compiling a huge monolithic everything in the past
>>     
>
> BTW, if you install confcache and enable FEATURES=confcache, it will
> speed things up a lot.
>
> Thanks,
> Donnie
>
>   

I thought it was ccache?  I did this a while back too.  Is this
something else we can use in addition to ccache?

Dale
:-)  :-)
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] X11 monster rebuild forced? Can I defer it?

[Bo Ørsted Andresen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 259 bytes --]

On Sunday 02 July 2006 21:17, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> BTW, if you install confcache and enable FEATURES=confcache, it will
> speed things up a lot.

Yes, but flameeyes p.masked it due to too many bad configure scripts in 
portage..

-- 
Bo Andresen

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] X11 monster rebuild forced? Can I defer it?

[Donnie Berkholz]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 304 bytes --]

Dale wrote:
> I thought it was ccache?  I did this a while back too.  Is this
> something else we can use in addition to ccache?

Yeah, it caches the results of configure scripts so they don't need to
re-run tests. Although as Bo suggests, there can be some occasional issues.

Thanks,
Donnie


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] X11 monster rebuild forced? Can I defer it?

[Alexander Skwar]

Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Alan McKinnon wrote:
>> I found the opposite effect with split ebuilds. Even with the
>> unpack/configure step, updating 100 splite packages out of 330+ was many
>> hours faster than compiling a huge monolithic everything in the past
> 
> BTW, if you install confcache and enable FEATURES=confcache, it will
> speed things up a lot.

confcache is gone from portage.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
What, after all, is a halo?  It's only one more thing to keep clean.
		-- Christopher Fry
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] X11 monster rebuild forced? Can I defer it?

[Alexander Skwar]

Dale wrote:

> I thought it was ccache?  I did this a while back too.  Is this
> something else we can use in addition to ccache?

confcache caches the results of all those ./configure runs, so that,
in theory, a check would only be done once. This would indeed speedup
./cnfigure runs.

ccache caches compiled "stuff". If you recompile a package (or a similar
package), not everything has to be compiled again.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
What, after all, is a halo?  It's only one more thing to keep clean.
		-- Christopher Fry
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] X11 monster rebuild forced? Can I defer it?

[leszek]

Le lundi 03 juillet 2006 à 12:36 +0200, Alexander Skwar a écrit :
> 
> confcache is gone from portage.
> 

why ?


--Leszek

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] X11 monster rebuild forced? Can I defer it?

[Dale]

Alexander Skwar wrote:
> Dale wrote:
>
>   
>> I thought it was ccache?  I did this a while back too.  Is this
>> something else we can use in addition to ccache?
>>     
>
> confcache caches the results of all those ./configure runs, so that,
> in theory, a check would only be done once. This would indeed speedup
> ./cnfigure runs.
>
> ccache caches compiled "stuff". If you recompile a package (or a similar
> package), not everything has to be compiled again.
>
> Alexander Skwar
>   
So I need to add this too huh??  I'll have to check into this.  I'm all
for speed.   < zoom >

Dale
:-)  :-)
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] X11 monster rebuild forced? Can I defer it?

[Alexander Skwar]

Dale wrote:
> Alexander Skwar wrote:
>> Dale wrote:
>>
>>   
>>> I thought it was ccache?  I did this a while back too.  Is this
>>> something else we can use in addition to ccache?
>>>     
>>
>> confcache caches the results of all those ./configure runs, so that,
>> in theory, a check would only be done once. This would indeed speedup
>> ./cnfigure runs.
>>
>> ccache caches compiled "stuff". If you recompile a package (or a similar
>> package), not everything has to be compiled again.
>>
>> Alexander Skwar
>>   
> So I need to add this too huh??  I'll have to check into this.  I'm all
> for speed.   < zoom >

Well, *need*  - dunno. It's nice, but it's rather error prone, as there are
too many "broken" packages out there. That's why confcache is now p.masked.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
Zoe: "Sir, I think you have a problem with your brain being missing."
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] X11 monster rebuild forced? Can I defer it?

[Alexander Skwar]

leszek wrote:
> Le lundi 03 juillet 2006 à 12:36 +0200, Alexander Skwar a écrit :
>> 
>> confcache is gone from portage.
>> 
> 
> why ?

Too many errors with too many broken packages, I'd suppose.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
Zoe: "Sir, I think you have a problem with your brain being missing."
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] X11 monster rebuild forced? Can I defer it?

[Donnie Berkholz]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 158 bytes --]

Alexander Skwar wrote:
> confcache is gone from portage.

No, it's not. It's in package.mask. I guess you need a new search tool. =)

Thanks,
Donnie


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 252 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] X11 monster rebuild forced? Can I defer it?

[Kevin O'Gorman]

On 7/2/06, Bo Ørsted Andresen <bo.andresen@zlin.dk> wrote:
> On Sunday 02 July 2006 16:25, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
> > So: is there something simple I can do to make portage ignore this update
> > but allow unrelated ones to go through? Then I'll probably do the upgrade
> > when I'm done teaching summer school.
>
> Actually noone forces you to run `emerge -vuDa world` on a daily basis. It you
> run it with pretend and see something you wish to upgrade then just emerge
> that with --oneshot. But I think this would prevent it from showing up at
> all:
>
> # echo >=xorg-base/xorg-x11-6.9 >> /etc/portage/package.mask
>
> --
> Bo Andresen

Thanks, that eased my pain (but it's actually x11-base  not xorg-base).

++ kevin

-- 
Kevin O'Gorman, PhD

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list