Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 15:34:12 -0400 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Stephen Montgomery-Smith <stephen@math.missouri.edu>, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>, "[LoN]Kamikaze" <LoN_Kamikaze@gmx.de>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Time to abandon recursive pulling of dependencies? Message-ID: <20070512193411.GA25051@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20070512193052.GA63649@icarus.home.lan> References: <464597C6.3030406@gmx.de> <20070512174011.GA22526@xor.obsecurity.org> <4645FF71.60100@gmx.de> <20070512175824.GA23103@xor.obsecurity.org> <20070512133054.B5588@math.missouri.edu> <20070512183634.GA23819@xor.obsecurity.org> <20070512134849.D5588@math.missouri.edu> <20070512193052.GA63649@icarus.home.lan>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 12:30:52PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: > On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 01:53:36PM -0500, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote: > > I believe that if this function is optimized, that practically all of the > > slowness issues we have seen with pkg_add, pkg_deinstall, etc, will be > > solved. Give me a few days. I think I will be able to make it work very > > much faster. For starters it uses a bubble sort. I can understand why they > > don't want to use a quicksort, because they want to check complete integrety > > of comparison tree (i.e. that there are no internal loops), but I recall > > seeing an algorithm due perhaps to one of or both of Hopcroft and Tarjan > > that uses a depth first search, maybe 20 years ago, that should be much > > faster, and I think I could reproduce it. > > Please don't use a bubblesort, it's incredibly inefficient. The *existing* algorithm is a bubble sort; Stephen is not proposing to replace it with one. Kris
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070512193411.GA25051>