From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 22 09:55:51 2005 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 0FA8F16A4CE; Tue, 22 Feb 2005 09:55:51 +0000 (GMT) Received: from heechee.tobez.org (heechee.tobez.org [217.157.39.226]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CBFD43D48; Tue, 22 Feb 2005 09:55:48 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from tobez@tobez.org) Received: by heechee.tobez.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id AA749125439; Tue, 22 Feb 2005 10:55:46 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 10:55:46 +0100 From: Anton Berezin To: Brian Fundakowski Feldman Message-ID: <20050222095546.GD19344@heechee.tobez.org> Mail-Followup-To: Anton Berezin , Brian Fundakowski Feldman , ports@FreeBSD.org References: <20050217204306.GA1116@green.homeunix.org> <20050221095009.GB60998@heechee.tobez.org> <20050221173024.GA1241@green.homeunix.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050221173024.GA1241@green.homeunix.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-Powered-By: FreeBSD http://www.freebsd.org/ cc: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: portsperf (bsd.port.mk performance bugs fixed) redux 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: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 09:55:51 -0000 On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 12:30:24PM -0500, Brian Fundakowski Feldman wrote: > On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 10:50:09AM +0100, Anton Berezin wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 03:59:13PM -0500, Brian Fundakowski Feldman wrote: > > > <@green_> then: > > > <@green_> green# time make extract > > > <@green_> ===> Extracting for mp3gain-1.3.2 > > > <@green_> => Checksum OK for mp3gain132_src.zip. > > > <@green_> ===> mp3gain-1.3.2 depends on executable: unzip - found > > > <@green_> 5.308u 82.765s 1:42.05 86.2% 92+193k 10+0io 12pf+0w > > Are you sure that the "then" part in your test was done with bsd.port.mk > > that contains this `${GREP} "${PORTNAME}"' snippet, and not before it > > was added? It is a recent addition, and it serves exactly the purpose > > of speeding up vulnerabilities checking. > Well, it's really not the same -- what about all the ports that have > ${PORTNAME} listed already? They'll match that simplistic test, and > still take several minutes to find out it's a false-positive, won't > they? There should be quite a few instance of usedta-be-vulnerable > ports, more than enough that it's worthwhile optimizing further... Agreed, it won't harm to optimize further, although we [hopefully] won't come anywhere near the 900+ shell invocations for any given port for years to come. :-) But then your patch should probably also add the ${GREP} ${PORTNAME} thingy for nvuln calculation too... \Anton. -- The moronity of the universe is a monotonically increasing function. -- Jarkko Hietaniemi