Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 10 Dec 2014 13:19:10 -0800
From:      Garrett Cooper <yaneurabeya@gmail.com>
To:        John-Mark Gurney <jmg@funkthat.com>
Cc:        Mark Peek <mp@freebsd.org>, svn-src-projects@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, Garrett Cooper <ngie@freebsd.org>, Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r275601 - projects/building-blocks
Message-ID:  <FDAF179A-B085-4EE2-AE58-445A2B64071C@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20141210210307.GX25139@funkthat.com>
References:  <201412080743.sB87h3j9044019@svn.freebsd.org> <1418054094.1064.147.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> <5485D8B5.90604@FreeBSD.org> <20141210210307.GX25139@funkthat.com>

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

--Apple-Mail=_5C7FD595-2BE0-4D56-9967-021EF5C907DB
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=windows-1252

On Dec 10, 2014, at 13:03, John-Mark Gurney <jmg@funkthat.com> wrote:

> Mark Peek wrote this message on Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 08:58 -0800:
>> On 12/8/14 7:54 AM, Ian Lepore wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2014-12-08 at 07:43 +0000, Garrett Cooper wrote:
>>>> Author: ngie
>>>> Date: Mon Dec  8 07:43:02 2014
>>>> New Revision: 275601
>>>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/275601
>>>>=20
>>>> Log:
>>>>  - Document why usr.bin/vi needs to be built as part of =
bootstrap-tools
>>>> ...snip...
>>>=20
>>> Is there any chance someone who understands vi could evaluate what =
it's
>>> being used for and perhaps eliminate it?  I know just enough about =
vi to
>>> get out of it if I accidentally get in.
>>>=20
>>> When I looked into this a few days ago it appears to be using it to =
sort
>>> the data before compiling (an optimization that problably hasn't =
been
>>> important to do since the 90s).  Could another existing build tool =
such
>>> as awk do the job?
>>=20
>> My reading of that code agrees with yours in that it is using 'ex' to=20=

>> prioritize some terminal entries in the termcap file. However, it is =
then=20
>> hashed into a berkeleydb via cap_mkdb which should render the initial=20=

>> prioritization useless. Rather than rewriting it I would suggest =
completely=20
>> removing the reordering and the ex dependency.
>=20
> There was some dicussion about removing some of the various databases,
> and having commonly used entries at the top would help in this case..

I was looking at Fedora 20=92s termcap just the other day, and I was =
surprised at the brevity in the file (only a couple entries for =
=93xterm=94). They also have it split into multiple files instead of =
just one file too (/usr/share/vte/termcap-0.0/xterm). Maybe this would =
be a good move going forward (or not=85???)?

Why should the .db files be removed? I think reducing the bloat from the =
files due to overestimated bucket sizes would be a good first start =
instead of just removing them altogether (I noticed that termcap.db has =
the same bloat problem services.db has).

Thanks!

--Apple-Mail=_5C7FD595-2BE0-4D56-9967-021EF5C907DB
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename=signature.asc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature;
	name=signature.asc
Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org

iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJUiLjOAAoJEMZr5QU6S73eBdUIAI6M8Pp9cO6j4W9JVgHSLoV3
JrDR+fgsiwVMpx1xLCaF/9rVcd4ITE/e7MJAX0rowubaMMM148ZCrwORY4WU9zPt
mOfRhEBq8LZ4CWmOyfj7lRbyWcyB3N997JcS2Q5j6za9XwXbRcRksFCJq429fJZZ
4x9Q2BBT4w3o6FTNheN0/kFr8dDJLqY3FHn2xFN4krzJMCDZnIOQnzPgkmEV04II
6s6kBeFgzc6lXfkEHUGABdTwUwE1llVTeOq4JzH0J9Vkl/g9QaS45IrZFpcOph5q
fYwOFxH+35FraFN9jNOc17h9XXTWViNbYbd0v33RctqLxQd2n3seb2rMGlxhaF0=
=w2aU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Apple-Mail=_5C7FD595-2BE0-4D56-9967-021EF5C907DB--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?FDAF179A-B085-4EE2-AE58-445A2B64071C>