From owner-freebsd-chat  Wed Jun  2 18:40:56 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org
Received: from oitunix.oit.umass.edu (nscs28p3.remote.umass.edu [128.119.179.151])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4FF214E5D
	for <freebsd-chat@freebsd.org>; Wed,  2 Jun 1999 18:40:47 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from root@oitunix.oit.umass.edu)
Received: (from root@localhost)
	by oitunix.oit.umass.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA01037
	for freebsd-chat@freebsd.org; Wed, 2 Jun 1999 21:40:46 -0400 (EDT)
	(envelope-from root)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 21:40:46 -0400 (EDT)
From: Charlie Root <root@oitunix.oit.umass.edu>
Message-Id: <199906030140.VAA01037@oitunix.oit.umass.edu>
To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org
Subject: Ports directory structure
Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

Recently there has been some discussion on other lists about a
"2-level port" system. This just got me thinking about the
hierarchical structure of the ports tree. One wonders, for
example, why have a directory called "patches" containing files
called "patch-aa", "patch-ab", etc? Seems redundant. ANyway, I
thought I'd post some quick results here, hoping they're not too
bogus and look forward to being edified, but not too severely
flamed, in return.

First, I have an up-to-date cvs repository for ports.

$ time cvs co ports

real    30m44.419s
user    0m42.624s
sys     2m26.730s

$ du -sk ports
71875

The size discrepency that arose in the other postings may just be
the result of the CVS directories.

$ find ports -name CVS | xargs rm -Rf 

$ du -sk ports
38731

Then, I wanted to get rid of some of the hierarchical structure,
so from the ports directory I did

$ mmv "*/*/*/*" =1/=2/=4

It appeared from browsing around that I got the results I wanted.
I may have lost some files, since mmv asked me about overwriting
existing Makefiles. So here's where I get concerned about
bogosity, but I don't think it's too bad. Following that, I just
relied on rmdir's refusal to remove empty directories

$ find ports -type d | xargs rmdir

Now, for example, instead of having this:

$ ls ports/mail/mutt
Makefile      files           patches         pkg

I have this:

COMMENT         PLIST           patch-01        patch-04
patch-08
DESCR           PLIST.htmlfiles patch-02        patch-05
patch-doc-ref
Makefile        md5             patch-03        patch-06
ru.gmo.u

And,

$ du -sk ports
32773

Then I imported this less structured ports tree and checked it
out.

$ time cvs co newports
real    13m31.740s
user    0m35.417s
sys     1m16.488s

$ du -sk newports
42068

So, just simplifying the structure would seem to give us a
smaller, "faster" ports tree. 

I don't consider any of this particularly earth-shattering.
Perhaps there are reasons for the additional directory structure.
Perhaps it's just aesthetic. I was just wondering.

Thanks,

Greg


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message