On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 21:47:27 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: >> The operations that are already done are pretty fast: ~60s to import a >> kernel tree, ~10s to import a new revision from a patch. > > By "importing", are you saying that importing all 60,000+ changesets of > the current kernel tree took only 60 seconds?
Now that would be impressive. No, I mean this: % bzcat ../linux.pkg/patch-2.5.14.bz2| patch -p1 % time bzr add -v . (find any new non-ignored files; deleted files automatically noticed) 6.06s user 0.41s system 89% cpu 7.248 total % time bzr commit -v -m 'import 2.5.14' 7.71s user 0.71s system 65% cpu 12.893 total (OK, a bit slower in this case but it wasn't all in core.) This is only v0.0.3, but I think the interface simplicity and speed compares well. I haven't tested importing all 60,000+ changesets of the current bk tree, partly because I don't *have* all those changesets. (Larry said previously that someone (not me) tried to pull all of them using bkclient, and he considered this abuse and blacklisted them.) I have been testing pulling in release and rc patches, and it scales to that level. It probably could not handle 60,000 changesets yet, but there is a plan to get there. In the interim, although it cannot handle the whole history forever it can handle large trees with moderate numbers of commits -- perhaps as many as you might deal with in developing a feature over a course of a few months. The most sensible place to try out bzr, if people want to, is as a way to keep your own revisions before mailing a patch to linus or the subsystem maintainer. -- Martin - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
