On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 7:57 PM, viv...@gmail.com wrote:
> Il 31/07/2012 21:27, Michał Górny ha scritto:
>> I'd be more afraid about resources, and whether the kernel will be
>> actually able to handle bazillion bind mounts. And if, whether it won't
>> actually cause more overhead than copying the
Il 31/07/2012 21:27, Michał Górny ha scritto:
On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 15:16:34 -0400
Rich Freeman wrote:
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Ian Stakenvicius
wrote:
Although that is true, it would be -WAY- too slow to generate said
list via equery/q* helpers; I think that's where the
extended-attri
On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 15:16:34 -0400
Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Ian Stakenvicius
> wrote:
> >
> > Although that is true, it would be -WAY- too slow to generate said
> > list via equery/q* helpers; I think that's where the
> > extended-attributes and/or cache idea comes
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On 31/07/12 10:55 AM, Michael Mol wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 10:48 AM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr."
>> wrote:
>>> On 7/26/12 8:26 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
I've been messing around w
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
>
> Although that is true, it would be -WAY- too slow to generate said
> list via equery/q* helpers; I think that's where the
> extended-attributes and/or cache idea comes into play.
I agree. This needs to be high-performance when it come
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 31/07/12 10:55 AM, Michael Mol wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 10:48 AM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr."
> wrote:
>> On 7/26/12 8:26 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>> I've been messing around with namespaces and some of what
>>> systemd has been doing with them,
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 10:48 AM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr."
wrote:
> On 7/26/12 8:26 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> I've been messing around with namespaces and some of what systemd has
>> been doing with them, and I have an idea for a portage feature.
>>
>> But before doing a brain dump of ideas, how usefu
On 7/26/12 8:26 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> I've been messing around with namespaces and some of what systemd has
> been doing with them, and I have an idea for a portage feature.
>
> But before doing a brain dump of ideas, how useful would it be to have
> a FEATURE for portage to do a limited-visib
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 6:35 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
>
> It seems like you might need some kind of copy-on-write support, at
> least to run pkg_setup. Apparently cowbuilder uses cow hardlinks for
> that. Another way would be to use fiemap (cp --reflink).
Reflinks would be a much clearer implementat
On 7/26/2012 11:26 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
I've been messing around with namespaces and some of what systemd has
been doing with them, and I have an idea for a portage feature.
But before doing a brain dump of ideas, how useful would it be to have
a FEATURE for portage to do a limited-visibility
On 07/26/2012 11:26 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> Implementing it wouldn't necessarily be hard - just create a tmpfs
> under /var/tmp/portage, unshare off a new mount namespace, and
> read-only bind-mount everything needed from the root filesystem
> (including /var/tmp/portage/...), and chroot into it.
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 8:26 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> I've been messing around with namespaces and some of what systemd has
> been doing with them, and I have an idea for a portage feature.
>
> But before doing a brain dump of ideas, how useful would it be to have
> a FEATURE for portage to do a
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
> (Really, this observation is more about simply making the information
> available; distcc could consume that information if someone chose to
> do the work to add that functionality.)
Well, I'm not sure how to get the info out of the internals
On 07/26/12 14:26, Rich Freeman wrote:
> I've been messing around with namespaces and some of what systemd has
> been doing with them, and I have an idea for a portage feature.
>
> But before doing a brain dump of ideas, how useful would it be to have
> a FEATURE for portage to do a limited-visibi
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> I've been messing around with namespaces and some of what systemd has
> been doing with them, and I have an idea for a portage feature.
>
> But before doing a brain dump of ideas, how useful would it be to have
> a FEATURE for portage to do a
I've been messing around with namespaces and some of what systemd has
been doing with them, and I have an idea for a portage feature.
But before doing a brain dump of ideas, how useful would it be to have
a FEATURE for portage to do a limited-visibility build? That is, the
build would be run in a
16 matches
Mail list logo
