Quoting Stephen Montgomery-Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (from
Thu, 17 May 2007 15:58:38 -0500):
Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
Alexander Leidinger wrote:
Quoting Stephen Montgomery-Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Wed,
16 May 2007 16:01:56 -0500):
If I get some positive feedback on this one, I'll submit a PR.
You can try it out by typing "make actual-package-depends" as
opposed to "make package-depends."
Did you my chance also had a look how to speed up ALL-DEPENDS-LIST? It
is used in clean-depends. And on my system it is slow (nearly 6 minutes
for gnome2) too. As portupgrade cleans before and after updating a
port, optimizing this may also be beneficial.
Maybe first trying to construct all dependencies of the installed ports
like in actual-package-depends and then the remaining ones like it is
done currently...
Bye,
Alexander.
I don't use "make clean" preferring a variant of "find /usr/ports
-name work -exec rm -rf {} \;".
I just looked at it. I really don't think it is worth the big effort
that we put into registering ports, because a make clean only happens
once or twice, unlike registering of the port which happens for every
single dependency.
"make install clean" is recommended to install a port. So it
contributes to the time the user sees.
I think it would be better to modify portupgrade to use find to delete
all the work in all the ports.
It is not allowed to delete all ports. What if I do a make in a
orthogonal port? It has to d o a make all-depends-list and clean the
ports in there, but that's what make clean does.
Bye,
Alexander.
--
It is when I struggle to be brief that I become obscure.
-- Quintus Horatius Flaccus (Horace)
http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7
http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID = 72077137
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
