Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org writes:
I am curious about the slowness of emerge.
Try a --backtrack=0 approach, I no longer need to increase it. :)
on a random box:
time emerge --backtrack=0 -pe @world
[...]
real0m30.016s
user0m29.268s
sys 0m0.704s
time emerge -pe @world
[...]
Hello Chris,
Friday, January 10, 2014, 1:08:39 AM, you wrote:
Right here is the big problem: you're not looking at this from the
perspective of the average Gentoo developer. We don't care about market
share. We don't care whether we're on top for another few years. There
are several forks of
Hello Heroxbd,
Friday, January 10, 2014, 4:16:47 AM, you wrote:
The ebuilds have approximately the same time to install, the failure
rate is about the same, emerge is getting slower.
I am curious about the slowness of emerge.
How about profile the portage and rewrite the time-crucial part
Am 10.01.2014 13:10, schrieb Igor:
Hello Chris,
Friday, January 10, 2014, 1:08:39 AM, you wrote:
Right here is the big problem: you're not looking at this from the
perspective of the average Gentoo developer. We don't care about market
share. We don't care whether we're on top for another
Am 10.01.2014 13:23, schrieb Igor:
You could make fast and correct decisions.
There is no such thing as the single correct decision. Management people
often think there is, but this is because management people often have
no clue what they are talking about.
Why not to get rid of Python at
Hello Heroxbd,
Friday, January 10, 2014, 4:16:47 AM, you wrote:
The ebuilds have approximately the same time to install, the failure
rate is about the same, emerge is getting slower.
I am curious about the slowness of emerge.
How about profile the portage and rewrite the time-crucial part
On 01/10/2014 08:30 PM, Igor wrote:
Hello Heroxbd,
Friday, January 10, 2014, 4:16:47 AM, you wrote:
The ebuilds have approximately the same time to install, the failure
rate is about the same, emerge is getting slower.
I am curious about the slowness of emerge.
How about profile the
Hello Heroxbd,
Friday, January 10, 2014, 4:27:00 AM, you wrote:
IMHO, the bleeding-edgeness and stability form a balance. We cannot
achieve both. Taking RHEL for example, it uses ancient software for the
sake of stability. Gentoo is way off the other extreme.
For the udev change, the
Hello René,
Friday, January 10, 2014, 4:26:03 PM, you wrote:
You may think that you're outside this rules but the competition is natural
on the planet and Gentoo is certainly competing weather you want it or not.
Competition was long before a human foot stood on the ground for the first
Am 10.01.2014 13:52, schrieb Igor:
And you belive that you're outside competition. It looks unreal.
Gentoo is in competition with other distros - it's real and happens
right now.
Again, just because this science called 'Economics' believes,
everything is in competition, does not change
Hello Patrick,
Friday, January 10, 2014, 4:39:59 PM, you wrote:
No, Python isn't slow.
Bad code is bad. You can write bad code in any language.
Are you sure? Take a look here:
http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u32q/benchmark.php?test=alllang=python3lang2=gppdata=u32q
of course these
Hello Patrick,
Friday, January 10, 2014, 4:39:59 PM, you wrote:
Bad code is bad. You can write bad code in any language.
BTW Perl is faster than Python too.
Try writing quick sort in Perl, Ptyhon and G++
then dump the memory.
And watch the miracle.
--
Best regards,
Igor
Am 10.01.2014 14:05, schrieb Igor:
Hello Patrick,
Friday, January 10, 2014, 4:39:59 PM, you wrote:
No, Python isn't slow.
Bad code is bad. You can write bad code in any language.
Are you sure? Take a look here:
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 7:41 AM, Igor lanthrus...@gmail.com wrote:
What I offer is to make the response and self-assessment on Gentoo
changes automated and fast. Then it will be getting better by itself.
The rate of experience Dev is attaining will jump several times up and
the level drudgery
Hi Igor,
Igor lanthrus...@gmail.com writes:
I've been using C/C++ since school it's fast, even bad code is working fast.
I WOULD NEVER BELIVE PYTHON IS AS FAST AS C++ with math algorithms
that do calculate staff and not call functions from pre-complied
objects written in C/C++.
It's crazy
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 8:10 AM, Igor lanthrus...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello Patrick,
Friday, January 10, 2014, 4:39:59 PM, you wrote:
Bad code is bad. You can write bad code in any language.
BTW Perl is faster than Python too.
Try writing quick sort in Perl, Ptyhon and G++
then dump the
On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 18:10:05 +0900
hero...@gentoo.org wrote:
Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org writes:
I am curious about the slowness of emerge.
Try a --backtrack=0 approach, I no longer need to increase it. :)
on a random box:
time emerge --backtrack=0 -pe @world
[...]
real
On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 09:02:46 -0500
Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 8:10 AM, Igor lanthrus...@gmail.com wrote:
If I ask somebody who knows nothing about algorithms to sort a list in
Python they're going to use foo.sort(). If I ask somebody who knows
nothing about
torsdag 09 januari 2014 23.18.28 skrev Ryan Hill:
On Thu, 09 Jan 2014 21:58:46 +0100
Magnus Granberg zo...@gentoo.org wrote:
Some time ago we discussed that we should enable stack smashing
(-fstack-protector) by default. So we opened a bug to track this [1].
The affected Gcc version
On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 16:52:12 +0400
Igor lanthrus...@gmail.com wrote:
You're living right not in competition.If you're on an island
you compete with animals for food and water. If you're in a condo -
hell, you know how many on this planet WISH to live in your house
right now and what stops
On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 01:35:09 -0500
Rick \Zero_Chaos\ Farina zeroch...@gentoo.org wrote:
More to the point, this specific use flag appears to have no purpose
what-so-ever. If a user can do exactly the same with
CFLAGS=-fno-stack-protector in make.conf, and it would be INSANE for a
package to
torsdag 09 januari 2014 17.56.56 skrev Ryan Hill:
On Thu, 09 Jan 2014 21:58:46 +0100
Magnus Granberg zo...@gentoo.org wrote:
- use hardened make_gcc_hard
+ if ( tc_version_is_at_least 4.8 || use hardened ) ! use vanilla ;
then
s/4.8/4.8.2
Or should we wait until the next
On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 16:24:38 +0100
Magnus Granberg zo...@gentoo.org wrote:
Hi
Have patched toolchain.eclass with the patch and with your change.
Updated 4.8.2 updated with the needed changes and commit it.
The use hardened gcc-specs-ssp append-cflags $(test-flags-CC -fno-stack-
protector)
please do not use html on the public mailing lists
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Hello All,
Thank you for all our feedback!
It's very good that we have all many different views on the same
subject. The nature designed us in a way that some part of us is
to survive in almost any situation. If everyone thought the same
they would make the same decisions and the probability of
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 08:48:30PM +0400, Igor wrote:
Do we have an agreement on this one from everyone of the list?
Agreement on what, precisely...?
In open source, better implementations usually gain more mindshare.
If you think you can write one (and the project is interesting to you)
go
Igor wrote:
Let's agree on following - I'll design the system in details on paper.
When it's ready (~ 1.5 months) I'll get back here and share the details.
You might be surprised how little people care about good design.
They choose kindof-working implementation every time.
//Peter
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 10/01/14 11:48 AM, Igor wrote:
Hello All,
Thank you for all our feedback!
It's very good that we have all many different views on the same
subject. The nature designed us in a way that some part of us is to
survive in almost any
Hello All,
As there are questions at to what we vote.
--
Thank you for all our feedback!
In project like that I can't rush to programming it without
everyone's approval. This part of the project should have been
implemented with the first portage
Am Freitag 10 Januar 2014, 21:18:58 schrieb Igor:
Hello All,
As there are questions at to what we vote.
--
Realistically most people haven't even read your mails (too much bla).
--
Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer
kde, council
Hello All,
As there are more questions rose. See you can't just think of everything,
what you need is an ability to improve fast :-)
--
Thank you for all our feedback!
In project like that I can't rush to programming it without
everyone's approval.
Hello Andreas,
Friday, January 10, 2014, 9:20:17 PM, you wrote:
As there are questions at to what we vote.
--
Realistically most people haven't even read your mails (too much bla).
Please read the following and vote.
What PortageQOS will be able
On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 21:26:47 +0400
Igor lanthrus...@gmail.com wrote:
In project like that I can't rush to programming it without
everyone's approval.
You don't need anyone's approval to do anything. Just go for it.
jer
Hello Andreas,
Friday, January 10, 2014, 9:20:17 PM, you wrote:
Realistically most people haven't even read your mails (too much bla).
And one more goal - without PortageQOS you're forever stuck with
the legacy portage design.
If the team ever decides to change Portage you'll need feedback
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 04:10:18PM +0400, Igor wrote:
Hello Chris,
Friday, January 10, 2014, 1:08:39 AM, you wrote:
Right here is the big problem: you're not looking at this from the
perspective of the average Gentoo developer. We don't care about market
share. We don't care whether
On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 08:31:21 +0800
Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 01/10/2014 08:16 AM, hero...@gentoo.org wrote:
Igor lanthrus...@gmail.com writes:
The ebuilds have approximately the same time to install, the
failure rate is about the same, emerge is getting slower.
I am
On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 09:16:47 +0900
hero...@gentoo.org wrote:
or ideally, borrowing the counterpart from paludis? How feasible is
that?
It's not.
--
Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 17:52:16 -0800
Patrick McLean chutz...@gentoo.org wrote:
Why not just switch to using pkgcore as the default package manager.
radhermit has been doing a lot of work lately getting EAPI 5 support
added, and generally fixing bugs etc.
Pkgcore is dead (see: still no EAPI 5
On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 14:18:24 +0100
René Neumann li...@necoro.eu wrote:
And again: What is needed is streamlining the algorithms (discussion
on that already started as far as I could notice). An algorithm in
O(n³) is always¹ worse than O(n). The constant factor added by the
Full dependency
On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 21:46:18 +0400
Igor lanthrus...@gmail.com wrote:
And one more goal - without PortageQOS you're forever stuck with
the legacy portage design.
If the team ever decides to change Portage you'll need feedback
on how the new portage works to patch it quickly in case there are
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/10/2014 10:50 AM, Ryan Hill wrote:
On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 01:35:09 -0500
Rick \Zero_Chaos\ Farina zeroch...@gentoo.org wrote:
More to the point, this specific use flag appears to have no purpose
what-so-ever. If a user can do exactly the
Am 10.01.2014 19:19, schrieb Ciaran McCreesh:
On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 14:18:24 +0100
René Neumann li...@necoro.eu wrote:
And again: What is needed is streamlining the algorithms (discussion
on that already started as far as I could notice). An algorithm in
O(n³) is always¹ worse than O(n). The
Chris Reffett posted on Thu, 09 Jan 2014 16:08:39 -0500 as excerpted:
To keep in power it's in your deepest interest to close the open gates
that invite competition while the power is in your hands.
PortageQOS is small step, it's not everything or main part of the
system, it's a just small
On 01/10/2014 10:50 AM, Ryan Hill wrote:
On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 01:35:09 -0500
Rick \Zero_Chaos\ Farina zeroch...@gentoo.org wrote:
More to the point, this specific use flag appears to have no purpose
what-so-ever. If a user can do exactly the same with
CFLAGS=-fno-stack-protector in make.conf,
Igor posted on Fri, 10 Jan 2014 21:26:47 +0400 as excerpted:
PS No way PortageQOS will work without uniform agreement. That thing was
missing from portage design from the start and now with the legacy it's
either everyone is willing to give it a try or none. I don't want to
push somebody to
Dnia 2014-01-10, o godz. 21:26:47
Igor lanthrus...@gmail.com napisał(a):
As there are more questions rose. See you can't just think of everything,
what you need is an ability to improve fast :-)
A starting note:
You've started *four* threads on the same subject *today* already.
As a result,
On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 15:08:02 -0500
Anthony G. Basile bas...@opensource.dyc.edu wrote:
On 01/10/2014 10:50 AM, Ryan Hill wrote:
Having slept on it I'm starting to agree. My first argument was that on
hardened ssp is -fstack-protector-all, which is much more expensive, and it
adds
On Thursday 09 January 2014 15:24:00 Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
On 9 January 2014 20:20, Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
well, the sep herd was kind of by design ... i didn't want it cluttering
up base-system@ and it is super convenient to abdicate all PAM decisions
to a single herd.
Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net writes:
Meanwhile, you might try googling Zynot. That was one early, perhaps the
first, Gentoo fork. Such talk of cutthroat competition in a zero-sum
game, of deliberately cutting off user options so they'd be forced to
stick with you, of it can be us or them,
On 10 January 2014 22:20, Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
how would moving it to base-system make any difference ? people doing it
wrong
wouldn't really care which herd pam itself is owned by.
I'm not saying it makes a difference, sorry I didn't make it clear.
Diego Elio Pettenò —
heroxbd posted on Sat, 11 Jan 2014 07:36:57 +0900 as excerpted:
Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net writes:
Meanwhile, you might try googling Zynot. That was one early, perhaps
the first, Gentoo fork.
I remember back in early 2004
Wow... What a history! I am educated. Thanks for sharing.
On 01/11/2014 02:11 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 08:31:21 +0800
Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 01/10/2014 08:16 AM, hero...@gentoo.org wrote:
Igor lanthrus...@gmail.com writes:
The ebuilds have approximately the same time to install, the
failure rate is about
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Sounds good. A couple of comments,
On 10/01/14 11:35, Brian Dolbec wrote:
General rule is to submit all patches to this list for review and
approval before committing.
s/committ/push
1) run pyflakes on your changes to check for faults,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi all,
Attached is a patch to test if Portage is going to write to a
read-only filesystem and print out the list of filesystems that need
to be remounted RW. This leaves ${D} intact rather than having some
files moved before hitting the RO
On Fri, 2014-01-10 at 22:07 -0500, Chris Reffett wrote:
Hi all,
Attached is a patch to test if Portage is going to write to a
read-only filesystem and print out the list of filesystems that need
to be remounted RW. This leaves ${D} intact rather than having some
files moved before hitting the
55 matches
Mail list logo
