Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 9 Feb 2016 10:12:45 -0500
From:      Jim Ohlstein <jim@ohlste.in>
To:        John Marino <freebsdml@marino.st>, Hrant Dadivanyan <hrant@dadivanyan.net>
Cc:        FreeBSD Ports ML <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Removing documentation
Message-ID:  <56BA01ED.7000504@ohlste.in>
In-Reply-To: <56B9F2D6.1090107@marino.st>
References:  <E1aT6jw-000MGn-1T@pandora.amnic.net> <56B9D609.6030407@marino.st> <56B9EDC7.1010403@ohlste.in> <56B9F2D6.1090107@marino.st>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help


On 2/9/16 9:08 AM, John Marino wrote:
> On 2/9/2016 2:46 PM, Jim Ohlstein wrote:
>> After all of this "discussion" I decided to give synth a try. I have no
>> pony in this race as I use neither portmaster nor portupgrade. Both may
>> still be in my repo, but they are not installed.
>
> Thanks for trying it!
>
>>
>> The build time of "like 20-30 minutes, at most" is ummm... let' just
>> call it optimistic. I only needed five new dependencies. Poudriere was
>> unable to take advantage of more than two parallel builders except for a
>> rather short overlap where it used three, if I recall correctly. The
>> vast majority of the time it used only one builder. Build and package
>> time for gcc6-aux was 34:52 on an Intel E5-2650 v3. Build and package
>> time for binutils, required for gcc6-aux, took 4:44. That's pretty close
>
> hmmm, my core i5 builds it in 10-12 minutes and I've had it ~4 years?
> I'm not sure why such a big descreptancy, but newer machines with 4-8Gb
> or more ram should have no issues with time.

Interesting. I just tested again and got 31:47. To be fair, I only allow 
that VM four cores. Perhaps it might do better with more?

>
>> to 40 minutes for just two dependencies, one of which is a dependency of
>> the other. Build and package time for synth was 1:09.
>>
>> I installed synth and had a look at the man page. Nice job on the
>> documentation though I might suggest more real world examples, in an
>> "Examples" section at the end, would be helpful to people like me who
>> want to understand how to get started. Sort of like a "quick start
>> guide" that comes with a new electronic component. Get it going and then
>> read the details on what's really important for the specific use case.
>> That shouldn't be construed as a knock on the documentation, which
>> really is very good.
>
> Do you think the illustrated README on the github page is helpful?
>
> https://github.com/jrmarino/synth
>

Yes, I do indeed. Thanks.

>
>> This was last night and I haven't tried building with it yet. I need to
>> re-read the documentation. I do however have concerns, the biggest of
>> which is, yes, the dependencies. I use poudriere because I like to build
>> packages myself for my installations and with my options, so using the
>> FreeBSD repo version of synth will be a non-starter. That means that
>> I'll need to rebuild gcc6-aux every time I need to rebuild synth,
>> assuming gcc6-aux has been updated. It's a fair guess that gcc6-aux is
>> regularly updated (the current version is dated 20160124). It's also a
>
> After gcc6 hits release (6.1), it will probably only be released with
> every point release (6.2, 6.3), which are separated by months.
>
>> fair guess that synth will go through a few iterations in the short term
>> given its youth. Looking at my recent build logs, the longest builds I
>
> It's feature complete and v1.00 is coming out in a few days (same as
> 0.99_6 with a version bump).  v1.1 will come soon after when I improve
> on the build-repository command to not scan the entire tree.  It's
> already been through the iterations, so I don't there will be that many
> more.  In any case, it's a small problem (and when gcc6-aux is released,
> it won't build the bundled libraries anymore but use other ports so it
> will be much, much faster to compile.
>
>
>> run are far shorter than 35 minutes. This will slow things down and I'm
>> not certain I'm going to be willing to keep a package in my repo that
>> requires that amount of build time just as a dependency I otherwise
>> would never build. To be honest, synth, which I will try, will have to
>> be _far_ superior to poudriere in order to replace it as my tool of
>> choice. Of course that's my use case and mine only.
>
> To be fair, poudriere users aren't the target audience.  Yes, it's
> significantly faster than poudriere and maybe people like the interface
> better, but if they are already set up on poudriere and happy with it,
> that's a fine choice too.
>
> It's more for people that aren't using poudriere, really should be, but
> are intimidated by it.
>

-- 
Jim Ohlstein


"Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the 
difference." - Mark Twain



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?56BA01ED.7000504>