Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 10:06:08 -0700 (MST) From: Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com> To: Michel Talon <talon@lpthe.jussieu.fr> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD needs fresh Blood! Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1103080941340.10045@wonkity.com> In-Reply-To: <20110308162439.GA98584@lpthe.jussieu.fr> References: <20110308162439.GA98584@lpthe.jussieu.fr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 8 Mar 2011, Michel Talon wrote: > Warren Block writes: >> >> portmaster -L | filterfu: 43.6 >> pkg_version -vl'<': 30.5 >> portversion -vl'<': 3.6 >> portmaster -L --index-only: 2.5 > > I don't have the same experience by far: > on a jail i have: > > ..... > ===>>> 68 total installed ports > ===>>> 61 have new versions available > portmaster -L --index-only 0.76s user 1.65s system 6% cpu 38.871 total > > So it takes 38s on a *very small* installation. The times are relative, of course, and mine are not from a jail. If there's a new index file, it will be downloaded and that is entirely dependent on bandwidth. For comparison, on a little system here with only 71 ports, the --index-only version takes 4.7 seconds when a new index is retrieved, and 1.2 seconds alone. > My experience is that all FreeBSD ports tools are incredibly slow, be > it portupgrade, portmaster, even the basic tools like pkg_version. > Maybe it would help to recognize that such observations are perhaps > not unrelated to the original poster comments. I don't understand what you mean by that last sentence. OP was talking about the difficulty of using or merging alternate ports trees, AFAIR. Sorry about the topic drift; we can start a new thread if appropriate.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1103080941340.10045>