On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 3:19 AM Alexis Ballier <aball...@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 08 May 2019 12:01:21 +0200
> Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2019-05-08 at 11:54 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > > On Wed, 08 May 2019 11:41:41 +0200
> > > Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > There's multilib that adds a lot of flags with a single eclass
> > > > > change, but I'd guess the number of packages and flags is
> > > > > constantly growing, so sooner or later you'll be hit by this
> > > > > again and no multilib killing will help you then.
> > > > >
> > > > > I think it is more future proof to use the addition of multilib
> > > > > flags to fix pkgcheck rather than actively reducing the number
> > > > > of multilib flags to cope with its limitations.
> > > >
> > > > Then please do it, by all means.  The reality is simple.  If the
> > > > tool is broken, you either fix it or stop doing what you know
> > > > that breaks it. Being unable to do the former, and having no good
> > > > replacement, I'd go for the latter.
> > >
> > > Well, why is it slow ? IO ? CPU ? Did you collect profiling data ?
> >
> > CPU definitely.  More detail than that, I don't and I don't have time
> > to investigate.
>
> So you don't have time to change 3 lines to add cProfile but do have
> time to send various emails and rework the entire multilib system ?
> weird.

This isn't productive.

If you'd like to do the work you're suggesting, I'm sure Michał will
support that, but as is you're just passive-aggressively questioning
his choices in the regards to the multilib system he created and the
CI system he created.

Reply via email to