On 13 August 2011 17:31, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm having real trouble here :(
>
> I just can't seem to get bzr to work! I've tried to branch gcc-linaro/4.6
> again and again, and it just won't. My other machine refuses to do the merge
> from lp:gcc/4.6, presumable because the bzr on
On 6 May 2011 10:13, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
> On 06/05/11 07:11, John Arbash Meinel wrote:
>>
>> In 2.4b? most commands that took>3min in my testing dropped into the
>> <30s range because of improved ordering while walking the inventory.
>> There are still a few more that can be improved a bit furth
On 5 May 2011 18:19, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
> On 05/05/11 16:22, Martin Pool wrote:
>>
>> I filed<https://bugs.launchpad.net/bzr-rewrite/+bug/777920> to track
>> this. I think it will have been improved a fair bit by John's recent
>> work on huge-tree worki
On 5 May 2011 17:08, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
> On 05/05/11 15:42, Martin Pool wrote:
>>
>> I'd like to know more about the case where it's slow, because we have
>> fixed up some of the other performance issues that were biting Linaro.
>> Could you tell me more,
On 5 May 2011 10:32, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Andrew Stubbs writes:
>> On 05/05/11 08:43, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>>> Anyway, the bzr help page seemed to suggest that merging in the new
>>> 4.6 revision was the Right Thing to do. I'm afraid that, once again,
>>> it felt so natural to resolve
