Re: sync suggestions [was Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Few things, which imho would make portage better]

2006-03-15 Thread tvali
But if any user-side changes are assumed to be separated? I mean if there is a boolean field user, which is triggered for user-changed tables. Or, to be simpler, i use 2 tables in my example. Lets assume that user wants to change description of dev-lang/php -- so that user has to change

Re: esearch integration [was Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Few things, which imho would make portage better]

2006-03-15 Thread tvali
Yes SQL tables are better for that as it's simpler to update them :) 2006/3/15, Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 04:33:06PM +0200, tvali wrote: I did think about it now and it seems to me that probably it would be much faster if esearch is not just another package,

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Few things, which imho would make portage better

2006-03-14 Thread tvali
2006/3/14, Simon Stelling [EMAIL PROTECTED]: tvali wrote: * Add package to world checking all dependencies, but not emerging * Remove package from world without unmergingUhm, why would you want that? On my computer, building takes several hours on some packages. I have used it in such way that it

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Few things, which imho would make portage better

2006-03-14 Thread tvali
I did think about some priorities too, so that it could be perfect for me. It should be possible to add package with a priority. I will give you an use case and explanation how i would use portage. emerge --justadd kdebase-meta kicker --priority 10 emerge --justadd kdenetwork-meta kdeutils-meta

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Few things, which imho would make portage better

2006-03-14 Thread tvali
Another place, where it would be good, is that it could interact well with GUI and it's Apply button. Another thing, what would be imho improved, is the speed of following functions: * emerge -s, emerge -S They should be cached somehow. Also, i think that when speaking about *speed* of portage,

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Few things, which imho would make portage better

2006-03-14 Thread tvali
Ok, i send a lot of them, but hopefully they're interesting :) I did research a bit about adding SQL support to portage -- as much as i see, mysql is smallest sql server, which could be emerged with python module. In beginning, i think that SQL database structure should be created, which

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Few things, which imho would make portage better

2006-03-14 Thread tvali
Thank you much! This is what i meant about searching :) Would it be now good to mix this esearch code with emerge, then adding fields to db and making emerge treebuilding fast, too? Or is there some utility to emerge, which does all that? 2006/3/14, Devon Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Try emerge

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Few things, which imho would make portage better

2006-03-14 Thread Marius Mauch
tvali wrote: Ok, i send a lot of them, but hopefully they're interesting :) I did research a bit about adding SQL support to portage -- as much as i see, mysql is smallest sql server, which could be emerged with python module. In beginning, i think that SQL database structure should be

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Few things, which imho would make portage better

2006-03-14 Thread Marius Mauch
tvali wrote: I did think about some priorities too, so that it could be perfect for me. It should be possible to add package with a priority. I will give you an use case and explanation how i would use portage. Heh, make the dep resolver even more complex ;) Also don't really see a need for

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Few things, which imho would make portage better

2006-03-14 Thread Alec Warner
tvali wrote: Ok, i send a lot of them, but hopefully they're interesting :) I would like to build sql table-structure after getting the information and send it into this list here so that you could hek out if it has something missing or poorly optimized. PS. i dont like rules of database

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Few things, which imho would make portage better

2006-03-14 Thread tvali
You're talking about the cache, take a look at the cache subsystem and write a mysql module for it. This will never become a default though (we would get killed if portage starts to depend on mysql). I think that it should not become default as mysql module, but if it is working, it should

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Few things, which imho would make portage better

2006-03-14 Thread felix
On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 12:10:57PM +0100, Simon Stelling wrote: tvali wrote: * When updating or installing new package, if something goes wrong, still emerge other packages, which havent failed packages as dependencies -- in my case, for example, when i do --update, for example, then the

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Few things, which imho would make portage better

2006-03-14 Thread tvali
2006/3/14, Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED]: tvali wrote: Ok, i send a lot of them, but hopefully they're interesting :) I would like to build sql table-structure after getting the information and send it into this list here so that you could hek out if it has something missing or poorly

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Few things, which imho would make portage better

2006-03-14 Thread Brian
On Tue, 2006-14-03 at 16:33 +0200, tvali wrote: I did think about it now and it seems to me that probably it would be much faster if esearch is not just another package, but part of portage. I mean -- functions of portage, which query db, should use esearch index wherever they need

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Few things, which imho would make portage better

2006-03-14 Thread solar
On Tue, 2006-03-14 at 15:50 +0200, Marius Mauch wrote: tvali wrote: I did think about some priorities too, so that it could be perfect for me. It should be possible to add package with a priority. I will give you an use case and explanation how i would use portage. Heh, make the

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Few things, which imho would make portage better

2006-03-14 Thread tvali
2006/3/14, Brian [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Tue, 2006-14-03 at 16:33 +0200, tvali wrote: If I recall, (there has been lots of discussion about converting portage to use databases, just check the mail archives and forum) portage already has sqlite support, but is not yet used. Sqlite is smaller and

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Few things, which imho would make portage better

2006-03-14 Thread Johannes Fahrenkrug
tvali wrote: I will consider what you sayd about db app design. Anyway, i usually try to keep tables more dynamic and look at task at hand, trying to make tables specially for it. When i tested normalizing, i got about 60 tables where i had 5 without normalizing. I'm not a Gentoo dev, but a

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Few things, which imho would make portage better

2006-03-14 Thread Brian
On Tue, 2006-14-03 at 17:32 +0200, tvali wrote: 2006/3/14, Brian [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Tue, 2006-14-03 at 16:33 +0200, tvali wrote: If I recall, (there has been lots of discussion about converting portage to use databases, just check the mail archives and forum) portage already has sqlite

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Few things, which imho would make portage better

2006-03-14 Thread tvali
I didnt think of case Item1, Item2, Item3. I thought of cases, for example, where i use Id field as TableName and IdInThatTable, where TableName shows, which table this IdInThatTable points and so on. I dont use, too, Item1/2/3 :) I just use tables sometimes in a more generalized form, where it's

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Few things, which imho would make portage better

2006-03-14 Thread tvali
2006/3/14, solar [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Tue, 2006-03-14 at 15:50 +0200, Marius Mauch wrote: Heh, make the dep resolver even more complex ;) Also don't really see a need for such a feature, pretty much no benefit with a lot of additional complexity. agreed. Ok, but if making it layered

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Few things, which imho would make portage better

2006-03-14 Thread tvali
Ok, i think i have reasonable amount of information to start something now :) As a last question -- what i do after some additions to portage? Send it where? 2006/3/14, tvali [EMAIL PROTECTED]: 2006/3/14, solar [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Tue, 2006-03-14 at 15:50 +0200, Marius Mauch wrote: Heh,

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Few things, which imho would make portage better

2006-03-14 Thread Grant Goodyear
tvali wrote: Ok, i think i have reasonable amount of information to start something now :) As a last question -- what i do after some additions to portage? Send it where? bugs.gentoo.org signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Few things, which imho would make portage better

2006-03-14 Thread Grant Goodyear
tvali wrote: And if it's not a bugfix? Still there? Yes, please. We use bugs.gentoo.org to track nearly everything Gentoo related. -g2boojum- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

esearch integration [was Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Few things, which imho would make portage better]

2006-03-14 Thread Brian Harring
On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 04:33:06PM +0200, tvali wrote: I did think about it now and it seems to me that probably it would be much faster if esearch is not just another package, but part of portage. I mean -- functions of portage, which query db, should use esearch index wherever they need

sync suggestions [was Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Few things, which imho would make portage better]

2006-03-14 Thread Brian Harring
On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 03:50:18PM +0200, tvali wrote: Another question now is about sync. I did read somewhere, that this is not good user behavior to sync more than once per day. I understand that as if this is a huge download even if there is nothing changed. Isnt it nice idea to have