On Wednesday, September 12, 2012, Richard Purdie < richard.pur...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Tue, 2012-09-11 at 20:44 -0600, Gary Thomas wrote: >> On 2012-09-05 22:35, Khem Raj wrote: >> > svn tar balls are 96M as compared to 1.3G git tars >> > its unnessary to suck in that much of data. >> > >> > Fixes [YOCTO #2908] >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.k...@gmail.com> >> >> What about this patch? Carrying around a 1.7GB (Sorry, Khem, that's the size of my tar ball!) >> is a bit much, especially when that's what I send to my customers... > > I've been hoping to find some time to do something with the fetcher to > try and fix this corner we've ended up pinned into. > > Ideally I'd like to see both gcc and eglibc using git, we have git in > ASSUME_PROVIDED and everything is optimal. > > I'm not going to reach the release point without doing something about > this but I would like to stick with git if we can possibly help it. > > Having to build subversion-native for critical path components is a > major pain and performance issue. >
I agree but then 1.7 GB is noticeably huge too and it will only become larger in future so I don't think fetching from git will be a good solution for gcc ever. I was thinking we could Generate tar ball ourselves and put it on yp mirror. And in future use up stream release tar balls. > Cheers, > > Richard > > > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-core mailing list > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core >
_______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
