Hi, this ends in flamewar again where IPS development team members ignore the reality without technical arguments. Yes, IPS is in development so the performance issue exists there with comparable tools. As such it is reported to IPS development team.
[email protected] píše v pá 05. 03. 2010 v 09:33 -0800: > On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 06:26:05PM +0100, Milan Jurik wrote: > > Could you show me in my own comment added to that bug, or comment from > > Marcel Telka, where we were not behaving rationally, please? Even the > > description from Ondrej Kubecka was not evaluated in the first comment > > correctly, no deep evaluation done. Before accusing somebody from > > ranting and irrational behaving it is better to evaluate the answer. > > You want me to continue the silly argument to prove that you're behaving > rationally? Hehe. > So no arguments from your side, only your personal feeling. > > I hope that IPS development team will be able to present comparisons of > > performance against other packaging systems before Solaris Next release. > > Shawn initially made this point in the bug report. And I pointed on some mistakes in it. > You're still not > making relevant comparisions between products. Where? YUM/RPM has similar set of features for customers (except ZFS snapshoting which has minimal impact during pkg installation). Including "sparse packages". > We've been improving our > performance, we're going to continue to improve our performance. Our > packaging system has correctness constraints. Unless you're comparing > it against something that takes the same considerations into account > when installing and upgrading packages, you're not making a correct or > fair comparison. > IPS is significantly slower than YUM/RPM and this is the reality, so the report is valid. Yes, it is even more significantly slower than SVR4 but the evaluation is much harder there because of SVR4 simplicity (as the implementation was never finished). But compare it to modern packaging systems like RPM is (hard to say it from man who is more dpkg-dependent). That's all. Best regards, Milan _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
