Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 13:44:02 +0200 From: Pav Lucistnik <pav@FreeBSD.org> To: soralx@cydem.org Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports system woes Message-ID: <1206963842.25210.31.camel@pav.hide.vol.cz> In-Reply-To: <20080331012347.55ebef1c@soralx> References: <1206526020.78560.37.camel@pav.hide.vol.cz> <20080331012347.55ebef1c@soralx>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--=-YdlAONZEMkblnNwKVfIK
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO8859-2
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
soralx@cydem.org p=ED=B9e v po 31. 03. 2008 v 01:23 -0700:
> > Quick solution would be to gather all depnames for the deleted package,
> > and then do a single pass over /var/db/pkg entries looking for origins.
> >=20
> > Ultimate solution would be to implement a database which would
> > concentrate origins for all packages with linear lookup time.
>=20
> I'm personally against of decresing complexity by means of incresing
> complexity of pkg_install suit (i.e., database instead of fs).
> I might have a distorted understanding, but UFS2 is an OK database in
> itself? Can't the the tools be made O(n) without resorting to moving
> everything to a DB?
You can't query, for example, which package installed some file, without
reading the complete +CONTENTS for all installed packages.
With, say, SQL database, you could do that under 10 blockreads.
> FS-based approach performs well enough when /var/db/pkg/ is cached, so
> IMO the issue is just that whole pkg/ tree doesn't fit in cache on
> machines with 256M RAM anymore (because of sheer monstrosity of the tree
> caused by them 'modular' approaches to large projects).
Not much we can do about that, we usually follow the rule
one vendor distfile =3D one port
and it has served us well. I would be strongly against merging X.org
ports back into a monolitic port again.
> I am probably wrong (didn't check in detail), but doesn't bsd.openssl.mk
> get invoked every time (every port install) if USE_OPENSSL=3D=3Dyes, no m=
atter
> if the openssl port is installed or not? Anyway, it'd be nice if dinoex
> could take a look at bsd.openssl.mk (does he need to be CC'd?)
bsd.openssl.mk does get included every time USE_OPENSSL is specified in
a port, but that's not a problem. The problem is execution of !=3D
assignments you pointed out, and these happen only when openssl port is
actually installed.
--=20
Pav Lucistnik <pav@oook.cz>
<pav@FreeBSD.org>
The Novice rogue. A rather shifty individual
--=-YdlAONZEMkblnNwKVfIK
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: Toto je =?UTF-8?Q?digit=C3=A1ln=C4=9B?=
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?_podepsan=E1?= =?UTF-8?Q?_=C4=8D=C3=A1st?=
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?_zpr=E1vy?=
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (FreeBSD)
iEYEABECAAYFAkfwzoIACgkQntdYP8FOsoINBgCgqgzXrUWcQOtQ0TUV60NyJ4XT
l9YAnRZe6aEJZgZRFxvkCInrYoTPJO2Q
=ur+l
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-YdlAONZEMkblnNwKVfIK--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1206963842.25210.31.camel>