On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 10:53:47PM +0000, Kevin Chadwick wrote: > On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 16:21:06 -0400 > Brad wrote: > > > Then said users put the manual work in to manually build certain > > packages using pseudo FLAVORs and such to cut down on building or > > just build them in the same manner as a bulk build. > > > No big deal just a let down after seeing evince build time being > reduced and wondered if there was a best of both. > > I'm guessing there's no quick and easy way for a bulk build environment > variable to be picked up as bulk builders and maintainers are more > likely to know to a greater depth, what they are doing? > > Still good to know installing poppler will save time.
I'm evaluating some changes that might give us the best of both worlds. My main concern right now is the potential for errors by divergence between bulk builds and normal builds. The technical issue being solved is that packages built by bulk and by hand must be identical, and the pkgpath used to reach the dependency is recorded in the package. By asking the dependent package its actual "true" path, I can normalize paths and strip pseudo flavors. So, it's complicated...
