On Jan 28, 2014 5:57 AM, "Neil Bothwick" <n...@digimed.co.uk> wrote: > > On Mon, 27 Jan 2014 22:54:28 +0100, hasufell wrote: > > > >> If it's about performance (in the sense of speed), then paludis > > >> is worse, because dependency calculation is more complex/complete > > >> there. > > > > > > That makes no sense at all. Paludis is written in a different > > > language using different algorithms. It's not about the amount of > > > work it does so much as how efficiently it does it. > > > That's exactly what I was saying. I was talking about speed, not > > efficiency. > > But the efficiency of the algorithm, and the language, affects the speed. > You can't presume "it does more, therefore it takes longer" if the two > programs do things in very different ways. >
I was thinking: is it feasible, to "precalculate" the dependency tree? Or, at least "preprocess" all the sane (and insane) dependencies to help portage? Rgds, --
