Hi James, Thanks for gathering the data and analyzing it!
I do not believe that speed of git-annex build should be a blocker to its inclusion into the tree. I'm just waiting for somebody to OK it before committing. Though maybe it's best to do that after the ghc 8.10 upgrade, not sure? James Cook <falsif...@falsifian.org> writes: > I agree with Greg's comment in the other thread that the ideal > solutions would be speeding up ghc or something like ccache. But I > still wonder if there's a quick-and-dirty way to get a modest speedup > without too much maintenance cost. For such a cache port to be of consequence it needs to contain a significant intersection of the dependencies of a non-trivial number of Haskell binary ports. As things stand, we have less than 10 ports. Only xmobar (+ git-annex and maybe pandoc in the future) would be big enough to bother with optimizing. > What about adding a single port with a "collection" of commonly used > Hackage libraries? print/texlive does this with latex packages. If we > added a port with the few hundred most-used hackage packages, and other > Haskell packages could start with that, I'm guessing that would cut > down the total build time a lot, at the cost of having one big slow > port. > > If there's any interest I could probably find some time to try > implementing it. I don't know how hard it would be. I propose we don't solve the problem until it's big enough to warrant our attention. I know I'm bad at predicting how things will develop a year from now. This is why I don't want to speculatively build more complexity. Thanks Greg
