2009/4/10 Nicolas Pierron <[email protected]>: > On the other hand we really want to remove duplicated packages. We > don't have enough feedback yet to decide if this step can be > automatically computed. An idea could be to report duplicated > dependencies coming from a derivation (by looking at name prefixes). > Reporting duplicated dependencies (in addition to the graph > exportation) is enough for any user to track back the options which > need to be activated to reduce the number of duplicated packages. > Moreover this could be helpful to avoid unwilling dependencies. > > In future version, we can imagine to report the minimal set of option > required to reduce the memory foot-print.
I also like ways of getting such reports. Now there can be made some tricks with the output of nix-store queries, am I right? Regarding these optimization problems we are dealing with... I'd like to note that I liked 'nix' a lot because I wanted to get all away from the "dynamic libraries mess". Before knowing 'nix', all I could desire was a linux distribution with all binaries statically compiled. So imagine how much I don't care about the increased memory or hd usage, if I never again have to take care of dynamic libraries problems. Of course 'nix' looked to me like a much better approach (and easier) than having a distro with all binaries statically compiled. Its great nix-store allows a lot of control on what's on the store, IMO. Regards, Lluís. _______________________________________________ nix-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.cs.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
