On Tuesday 18 January 2005 07:45, Stuart Longland wrote: > The results: > > First Run: 36min 15.996sec > Second Run: 22min 56.704sec > Third Run: 2min 56.696sec That's horrible, yeah. And it makes me say two things: - We need confcache, because confcache would reuse configure results _between_ packages, so that you ran kdebase's configure once, and then kdenetwork kdepim etc (and their derived ebuilds) would get cached results. That's 15 times as fast as configuring all of today's monolithic ebuilds without confcache. - Autoconf itself needs to be fixed or replaced. Its overhead is simply way too high, and apparently it wasn't designed with a performance constraint on configure scripts in mind. If it was, it'd have had better cache support built in, so that we wouldn't need to write something like confcache ourselves. There are other tricks it could have employed, too...
Can someone here speak in defense of autoconf? > Personally, I'd much rather keep the monolithic packages as the KDE > developers intended. They didn't intend that, and they're prefectly happy with nearly every distro but ours creating separate packages for separate apps. There hasn't been a big flocking of KDE.org developers to Gentoo because of its monolithic ebuilds. > I think the better way to handle this would be to > set an environment variable... e.g. > > # KDE_PKG='+konqueror +kicker +kdm -kicker' emerge kdebase As I replied below in this thread, this has almost all the disadvanatges of DO_NOT_COMPILE. -- Dan Armak Gentoo Linux developer (KDE) Public GPG key: http://dev.gentoo.org/~danarmak/danarmak-gpg-public.key Fingerprint: DD70 DBF9 E3D4 6CB9 2FDD 0069 508D 9143 8D5F 8951
pgpbk6TYc3taG.pgp
Description: PGP signature
