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 3472A138A1F for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 03:51:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8740CE0C48; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 03:51:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2C630E0C3B for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 03:51:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.4.5] (blfd-4db0f970.pool.mediaWays.net [77.176.249.112]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: hasufell) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C6AB833EE9E for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 03:50:58 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <52E9CC1F.6080900@gentoo.org> Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 04:50:55 +0100 From: hasufell User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 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 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage performance dropped considerably References: <20140126162426.7a6d1f30@falcon.eroen.eu> <52E54920.5010207@gmail.com> <52E54E34.7080709@gentoo.org> <52E64A27.9090105@libertytrek.org> <52E659F1.1090508@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <52E659F1.1090508@gmail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 6e99c8cc-7707-4c7a-bbfb-6c2b4812752a X-Archives-Hash: 405c782a1e3707579747ca00bfa5a2ea -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 01/27/2014 02:06 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote: > On 27/01/2014 13:59, Tanstaafl wrote: >> On 2014-01-26 1:04 PM, hasufell wrote: >>> So, not sure where your optimism comes from. But... some devs >>> are interested in starting from scratch or picking up pkgcore >>> (which would be the most sane thing to do IMO). >> >> ? >> >> If the problem is really this potentially serious, why start >> from scratch, when Paludis is already very mature? Is it pure >> politics (someone just doesn't like Ciaran)? >> >> >> > > > No-one likes to admit it, but I think there's some NIH going on > I just tried paludis again (after some time). Things that make it currently impossible to properly migrate my portage config: * you cannot unmask USE flags at all, not without hackery... and that is really non-trivial for unmasking abi_x86_32 globally, because those masks are scattered across a lot of files in profiles/ The explanation from the paludis developer is simply wrong: http://paludis.exherbo.org/trac/ticket/817 * seems there is no equivalent to --dynamic-deps=y (which is default in emerge)... either I am missing something or this is a pretty good reason to not use it -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJS6cwfAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWz+MoIAJvH9zDbsVQaRwyb+yMEowJ8 qXjaLmDTx5BFyyL7tSelFEYyNwh0DN1ypyOQu2VkScNOTNIbqfffWXsAPoe4GJrP pngtb9xo4H4/IIdtr7i8fwRU937UK5V4Fq0Er/e56SGpdHG3G+emxrBeuB2Y6n0M m+gdEI1xmSuB/YOd/byDc+t9qK1688qM23fHJd/SsW732FY9ooUlfSZuO39ltjpk 96ojLyGe4TAp5zkk2BNBbpLXyuAtszwsc8U5nPN89v87gbC7gH5pIrJDXbQkRfMF EP0ouZ6nfB4cDqFM1/GVvJ2+V24jleWkpV3UQmCPDAd18T6Qa/fkujz0JuijXAg= =FfQN -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----