From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 29 08:15:44 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8ECD316A4CE for ; Wed, 29 Oct 2003 08:15:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from rutger.owt.com (rutger.owt.com [204.118.6.16]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85BDD43FA3 for ; Wed, 29 Oct 2003 08:15:41 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kstewart@owt.com) Received: from topaz-out (owt-207-41-94-233.owt.com [207.41.94.233]) by rutger.owt.com (8.11.6p2/8.9.3) with ESMTP id h9TGFbu11150; Wed, 29 Oct 2003 08:15:37 -0800 From: Kent Stewart To: Andrew J Caines , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 08:15:36 -0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 References: <20031029042715.57311.qmail@web60301.mail.yahoo.com> <20031029155727.GD15764@hal9000.halplant.com> In-Reply-To: <20031029155727.GD15764@hal9000.halplant.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200310290815.36608.kstewart@owt.com> Subject: Re: INDEX-5 is deleted then reconstructed by "make index" X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 16:15:44 -0000 On Wednesday 29 October 2003 07:57 am, Andrew J Caines wrote: > Jeremy, > > > I don't think so, because you still have to wait for the databases to be > > rebuilt, before you can use portversion. > > But since you will typically be cvsup'ing, building, updating dbs and such > during `off hours', ie. not sitting in front of the terminal waiting for > it to finish, the db rebuilds don't take any important time. > > I do it like this[1] > > I was surprised by your timing results: > > # time portversion -l "<" > > 3.127u 0.653s 0:08.02 47.0% 22+9776k 1003+0io 0pf+0w > > # time pkg_version -l \< > > 29.930u 11.442s 0:49.49 83.5% 327+540k 1093+0io 63pf+0w > > On my two FreeBSD boxes with up-to-date ports and built indices (portsdb > -Uu; pkgdb -u), I get quite the opposite results: > > PII-266, 384MB, ports on old 4.5GB UW SCSI disk, 4.9-RC[2]: > > # time portversion -l "<" > real 0m15.162s, user 0m6.556s, sys 0m1.407s > # ttime pkg_version -l \< > real 2m24.996s, user 1m45.382s, sys 0m28.736s > > P4-1700, 384MB, ports on newish 20GB ATA-5 disk, 5.1p10[3]: > > # time portversion -l "<" > real 0m5.528s, user 0m1.027s, sys 0m0.407s > # time pkg_version -l \< > real 0m23.175s, user 0m10.967s, sys 0m7.034s > > > Result: The 'my' way is a winner, easier and quick. :-) > > So what is the major difference between your setup and mine? Wait till a change like the last upgrade to gettext comes along and you have to rebuild all of the ports that use it. He will have to rebuild each of them manually. You can use portupgrade recursively on gettext and wait for it to finish. Kent > > > But, I don't know how it will make the difference if I have the 9,000 > > packages installed. > > 231 installed on the PII, 188 on the P4, all built from ports. > > > [1] http://halplant.com:88/software/FreeBSD/scripts/update_fbsd > [2] http://halplant.com:88/systems.html > [3] Find disk specs for the Optiplex GX400 on Dell's web site and win > a prize for persistence in the face of crappy design and slow delivery. > > > -Andrew- -- Kent Stewart Richland, WA http://users.owt.com/kstewart/index.html