On Sat, 8 Nov 2014 13:35:20 + Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Nov 2014 13:56:21 +0300
> Andrew Savchenko wrote:
> > Wanna ~20-30 minutes with sqlite metadata cache enabled?
> > Try on Intel Atom N270 with 2800 packages installed.
> > Dependency resolution is utterly slow.
>
> Well I highly
On Sat, 08 Nov 2014 15:45:30 -0800 Zac Medico wrote:
> On 11/08/2014 03:33 PM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> > We can choose for "code that works reasonably fast" - portage hasn't
> > gotten any noticeable work on performance in a while, and people have
> > just piled on more and more features and complex
On 11/09/2014 01:08 AM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> On 11/09/2014 08:04 AM, hasufell wrote:
>> On 11/09/2014 12:33 AM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
>>> It's not about NIH, it's about slow code being slow.
>>>
>>
>> Can't disagree more. It's about wrong results, broken systems,
>> unreadable error messages, days
On 11/09/2014 08:04 AM, hasufell wrote:
> On 11/09/2014 12:33 AM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
>> It's not about NIH, it's about slow code being slow.
>>
>
> Can't disagree more. It's about wrong results, broken systems,
> unreadable error messages, days of figuring out ruby, perl, haskell,
> multilib, py
On 11/09/2014 12:33 AM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> It's not about NIH, it's about slow code being slow.
>
Can't disagree more. It's about wrong results, broken systems,
unreadable error messages, days of figuring out ruby, perl, haskell,
multilib, python blockers, incorrect autounmask suggestions and
On 11/08/2014 03:52 PM, hasufell wrote:
> On 11/08/2014 11:39 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
>> On 11/08/2014 02:05 PM, hasufell wrote:
>>> I have a feeling that this is an assumption as well. PMS just says this
>>> is an 'any-of' group. There is not a single word about the processing
>>> order of these spe
On 11/08/2014 11:39 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 11/08/2014 02:05 PM, hasufell wrote:
>> I have a feeling that this is an assumption as well. PMS just says this
>> is an 'any-of' group. There is not a single word about the processing
>> order of these specs or which one to prefer, in which case some
On 9 November 2014 09:06, Zac Medico wrote:
> Since EAPI 5, you need to either add test to IUSE, or else we need to
> add the test flag to IUSE_IMPLICIT in the base profile (that would
> require some discussion of pros/cons).
>
It should have been needed on EAPI4 too, but due to a side effect of
On 11/08/2014 03:33 PM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> We can choose for "code that works reasonably fast" - portage hasn't
> gotten any noticeable work on performance in a while, and people have
> just piled on more and more features and complexity.
Yes, as one of only 2 people who have worked on the res
On 11/08/2014 10:48 PM, hasufell wrote:
> On 11/08/2014 02:24 PM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
>> On 11/08/2014 03:08 AM, hasufell wrote:
>>> On 11/07/2014 07:54 PM, Matthias Maier wrote:
> Well, you're not comparing like with like. Paludis with "everything
> turned off" does more than Portage with
On 11/08/2014 02:05 PM, hasufell wrote:
> On 11/08/2014 10:52 PM, Jauhien Piatlicki wrote:
>> 08.11.14 22:47, hasufell написав(ла):
>>> On 11/08/2014 10:30 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 2:48 PM, hasufell wrote:
> On 11/08/2014 08:32 PM, hasufell wrote:
>>> Sorry to ch
On 11/08/2014 10:52 PM, Jauhien Piatlicki wrote:
> 08.11.14 22:47, hasufell написав(ла):
>> On 11/08/2014 10:30 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>> On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 2:48 PM, hasufell wrote:
On 11/08/2014 08:32 PM, hasufell wrote:
>> Sorry to chime in like that but if you don't mind, I'd lik
08.11.14 22:47, hasufell написав(ла):
> On 11/08/2014 10:30 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 2:48 PM, hasufell wrote:
>>> On 11/08/2014 08:32 PM, hasufell wrote:
> Sorry to chime in like that but if you don't mind, I'd like to ask for a
> real-life example for badly declar
On 11/08/2014 10:30 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 2:48 PM, hasufell wrote:
>> On 11/08/2014 08:32 PM, hasufell wrote:
>>> On 11/08/2014 08:01 PM, Matthias Dahl wrote:
Hello Ciaran...
On 08/11/14 19:26, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> No. It would make sense to i
On Sat, 08 Nov 2014 20:49:10 +0100
Thomas Kahle wrote:
> However, repoman complains:
>
> REQUIRED_USE.syntax 1
>media-libs/leptonica/leptonica-1.71-r1.ebuild: REQUIRED_USE: USE
> flag 'test' is not in IUSE
>
> I commited with -f, because I think repoman is wrong. Any opinions?
Dnia 2014-11-08, o godz. 20:49:10
Thomas Kahle napisał(a):
> Hi,
>
> it seems to be a quasi-standard in the tree to use REQUIRED_USE
> if the tests of some package need USE flags. However, repoman
> complains:
>
> REQUIRED_USE.syntax 1
>media-libs/leptonica/leptonica-1.71-r1.eb
On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 2:48 PM, hasufell wrote:
> On 11/08/2014 08:32 PM, hasufell wrote:
>> On 11/08/2014 08:01 PM, Matthias Dahl wrote:
>>> Hello Ciaran...
>>>
>>> On 08/11/14 19:26, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>>>
No. It would make sense to introduce a cultural change, where
developers sto
Andrew Savchenko posted on Sat, 08 Nov 2014 13:56:21 +0300 as excerpted:
> Wanna ~20-30 minutes with sqlite metadata cache enabled?
> Try on Intel Atom N270 with 2800 packages installed. Dependency
> resolution is utterly slow.
Hmm. My netbook's an Atom N270 also. But I use a build-image chroot
On 11/08/2014 11:49 AM, Thomas Kahle wrote:
> Hi,
>
> it seems to be a quasi-standard in the tree to use REQUIRED_USE
> if the tests of some package need USE flags. However, repoman
> complains:
>
> REQUIRED_USE.syntax 1
>media-libs/leptonica/leptonica-1.71-r1.ebuild: REQUIRED_US
Hi,
it seems to be a quasi-standard in the tree to use REQUIRED_USE
if the tests of some package need USE flags. However, repoman
complains:
REQUIRED_USE.syntax 1
media-libs/leptonica/leptonica-1.71-r1.ebuild: REQUIRED_USE: USE flag
'test' is not in IUSE
I commited with -f, becau
On 11/08/2014 08:32 PM, hasufell wrote:
> On 11/08/2014 08:01 PM, Matthias Dahl wrote:
>> Hello Ciaran...
>>
>> On 08/11/14 19:26, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>>
>>> No. It would make sense to introduce a cultural change, where
>>> developers stop writing dependencies that seem to work with some
>>> par
On 11/08/2014 08:01 PM, Matthias Dahl wrote:
> Hello Ciaran...
>
> On 08/11/14 19:26, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>
>> No. It would make sense to introduce a cultural change, where
>> developers stop writing dependencies that seem to work with some
>> particular version of Portage if you don't look ve
Hello Ciaran...
On 08/11/14 19:26, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> No. It would make sense to introduce a cultural change, where
> developers stop writing dependencies that seem to work with some
> particular version of Portage if you don't look very closely, and start
> writing good dependencies.
Sorr
On Sat, 8 Nov 2014 10:11:13 -0800
Hilco Wijbenga wrote:
> So would it make sense then to move to a more declarative ebuild
> model? Or just a "better" model?
No. It would make sense to introduce a cultural change, where
developers stop writing dependencies that seem to work with some
particular v
On 8 November 2014 05:40, Ciaran McCreesh
wrote:
> On Fri, 07 Nov 2014 20:57:41 +0100
> Jauhien Piatlicki wrote:
>> What;s wrong with input? PMS itself or how do maintainers write
>> ebuilds? Could you explain?
>
> A mixture of both. Gentoo developers like writing eclasses that write
> unnecessar
I've commited a live ebuild for libvirt-python to CVS. Given the fact
that we already have one for libvirt and one for virt-manager, this
makes sense.
Best,
Matthias
*libvirt-python- (08 Nov 2014)
08 Nov 2014; Matthias Maier +libvirt-python-.ebuild:
provide live ebuild as suggested
On 11/08/2014 02:24 PM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> On 11/08/2014 03:08 AM, hasufell wrote:
>> On 11/07/2014 07:54 PM, Matthias Maier wrote:
Well, you're not comparing like with like. Paludis with "everything
turned off" does more than Portage with "everything turned on". If all
you're lo
Il 08/11/2014 14:35, Ciaran McCreesh ha scritto:
> On Sat, 08 Nov 2014 09:29:52 +0100
> "viv...@gmail.com" wrote:
>> "The time dependency resolving takes is marginal compared to the whole
>> update process "
>> ^^^ this is an utter lie for frequent updates
> Uh, how long are your resolves taking?
On 8 November 2014 19:15, Jauhien Piatlicki wrote:
> Hi Ben,
>
> Have you read comments on Qt overlay commit? Have you check reverse
> dependencies of packages you are masking? razorqt-base/libqtxdg is used by
> LXQt. So, please, unmask it. I will move it into lxqt-base category. But
> until th
On Fri, 07 Nov 2014 22:04:57 +0100
hasufell wrote:
> Next thing that comes to my mind is: indeterministic results. I'v had
> LOTS of them with portage. You run an emerge, abort. You run it
> again... and woosh, different result.
> I'v not hit that case yet with paludis, unless I ran it with differ
On Fri, 07 Nov 2014 20:57:41 +0100
Jauhien Piatlicki wrote:
> What;s wrong with input? PMS itself or how do maintainers write
> ebuilds? Could you explain?
A mixture of both. Gentoo developers like writing eclasses that write
unnecessarily clever, highly messy and technically incorrect dependency
On Sat, 08 Nov 2014 09:29:52 +0100
"viv...@gmail.com" wrote:
> "The time dependency resolving takes is marginal compared to the whole
> update process "
> ^^^ this is an utter lie for frequent updates
Uh, how long are your resolves taking?
--
Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP sig
On 11/08/2014 03:08 AM, hasufell wrote:
> On 11/07/2014 07:54 PM, Matthias Maier wrote:
>>> Well, you're not comparing like with like. Paludis with "everything
>>> turned off" does more than Portage with "everything turned on". If all
>>> you're looking for is the wrong answer as fast as possible,
I see it was unmasked back already. Thanks.
--
Jauhien
08.11.14 12:15, Jauhien Piatlicki написав(ла):
> Hi Ben,
>
> Have you read comments on Qt overlay commit? Have you check reverse
> dependencies of packages you are masking? razorqt-base/libqtxdg is used by
> LXQt. So, please, unmask it. I
Hi Ben,
Have you read comments on Qt overlay commit? Have you check reverse
dependencies of packages you are masking? razorqt-base/libqtxdg is used by
LXQt. So, please, unmask it. I will move it into lxqt-base category. But until
this, please, do not touch it. And, please, make sure you are rea
On Fri, 07 Nov 2014 20:08:12 +0100 hasufell wrote:
> On 11/07/2014 07:54 PM, Matthias Maier wrote:
> >> Well, you're not comparing like with like. Paludis with "everything
> >> turned off" does more than Portage with "everything turned on". If all
> >> you're looking for is the wrong answer as fast
On Fri, 7 Nov 2014 19:21:01 + Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 07 Nov 2014 19:54:08 +0100
> Matthias Maier wrote:
> > Currently, for portage just to decide that nothing has to be done on
> > my machine takes around 1 minute.
>
> Are you running with or without metadata cache? If you're runnin
Il 07/11/2014 20:08, hasufell ha scritto:
> Also, I don't understand these discussions. The time dependency
> resolving takes is marginal compared to the whole update process, no
> matter what PM you use.
"The time dependency resolving takes is marginal compared to the whole
update process "
^^^ th
38 matches
Mail list logo
