Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Tue, 24 Feb 2009 08:08:23 +0100 Uh, your benchmarks are nonsense.
Provide your nonsensical ones.
That is not how metadata checks work.
Explain how they work, regen works that way...
By parsing the ebuilds you're talking doubling the number of file reads required to get the job done, and massively increasing the number of seeks required.
Apparently it doesn't impact anything.
But that isn't even the main issue. The main issue is that even if you retroactively pretend that all ebuilds are in a format they're not, and ignore the breakage, and then wait for a year for package managers to try to parse your new format, you *still* can't change name or versioning rules.
why? when portage would breanch if I put an ebuild with a wacky version AND there is a valid cache for that telling its eapi 99 ?
Again, these are all things that have been discussed at length previously. Please either come up with a legitimate technical objection, or admit that you've seen the light.
the glep doesn't show any of those nor reference to it, as I said before, do your homework and probably more people will be happier with your proposals.
lu -- Luca Barbato Gentoo Council Member Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero
