> On Aug 10, 2016, at 8:28 PM, Lawrence Velázquez <lar...@macports.org> wrote: > >> On Aug 10, 2016, at 9:04 PM, Ryan Schmidt <ryandes...@macports.org> wrote: >> >>> On Aug 10, 2016, at 5:15 PM, Mojca Miklavec <mo...@macports.org> wrote: >>> >>> The major problem is that there is basically no way to predict how >>> much space an installation of a port from source might need (one might >>> be able to do some heuristics based on old build logs from the >>> buildbot or so, but that might be quite some work for very little gain >>> and it won't work well for non-default variants etc). >> >> It would be easy for the buildbot to record the size of the installed >> package, even if the package isn't distributable, and could submit that >> information to our hypothetical new web site, from which MacPorts could >> query it. > > This could be helpful, but it wouldn't provide information about the > *maximum* disk space required by a build, which could easily surpass the size > of the final build products.
That's true. The buildbot could also record the size of the work directory before it's cleaned up. That wouldn't be 100% accurate either, since it's possible for a build to create temporary files that are cleaned up during the build, such as the gcc ports, but it would be a place to start. _______________________________________________ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
