From nobody Wed Apr 1 17:13:17 2026 X-Original-To: freebsd-current@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4fmBLR4DL9z6Y94H for ; Wed, 01 Apr 2026 17:09:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from fbsd@www.zefox.net) Received: from www.zefox.net (www.zefox.net [50.1.20.27]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "pelorus.zefox.org", Issuer "pelorus.zefox.org" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4fmBLQ0xLJz454j for ; Wed, 01 Apr 2026 17:09:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from fbsd@www.zefox.net) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=none (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of fbsd@www.zefox.net has no SPF policy when checking 50.1.20.27) smtp.mailfrom=fbsd@www.zefox.net Received: from www.zefox.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by www.zefox.net (8.18.1/8.18.1) with ESMTPS id 631HDI0Q095926 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 1 Apr 2026 10:13:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from fbsd@www.zefox.net) Received: (from fbsd@localhost) by www.zefox.net (8.18.1/8.18.1/Submit) id 631HDI3C095925; Wed, 1 Apr 2026 10:13:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from fbsd) Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2026 10:13:17 -0700 From: bob prohaska To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Cc: bob prohaska Subject: Etcupdate runtime has more than doubled....Why? Message-ID: List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-current List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-0.07 / 15.00]; AUTH_NA(1.00)[]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.99)[-0.986]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.98)[-0.984]; MID_RHS_WWW(0.50)[]; WWW_DOT_DOMAIN(0.50)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:7065, ipnet:50.1.16.0/20, country:US]; MISSING_XM_UA(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-current@freebsd.org]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[zefox.net]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[no SPF record] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4fmBLQ0xLJz454j X-Spamd-Bar: / For some time now I've been using etcupdate on a self-hosting armv7 (RPi2) system. Lately, the runtime for etcupdate after a world/kernel update from source has seemingly more than doubled. It used to take less than one hour, now it's past two hours and not done yet. The last process is a series of c++ processes which take most of the added time. Apart from tracking -current the machine doesn't do much, but I didn install a /usr/ports directory recently though it's only been used to build named. The slowdown in etcupdate seems to have appeared following that change. Might the addition of a ports tree have increased etcupdate's run time, and is there in any case some housecleaning that will speed it up? Thanks for reading, bob prohaska