Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 07:40:38 +0000 From: Matthew Seaman <matthew@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: poudriere: reduce the number of rebuilt packages? Message-ID: <54B4CBF6.70001@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <54B4372C.9040803@siol.net> References: <54A67B1A.5060007@gmx.net> <54A97748.9000401@gmx.net> <F8F2C00190BADAE1AA7CFEF8@atuin.in.mat.cc> <54B3FD78.5060404@gmx.net> <D5E3B7024DE7A949DDF12468@ogg.in.absolight.net> <54B40822.9000702@gmx.net> <23A49BD336E4EC29F493416A@ogg.in.absolight.net> <54B4372C.9040803@siol.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --cDbEKkQ0qX8wNtvcwfnX4dbiMbpoG2QAB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 12/01/2015 21:05, Karel Miklav wrote: > On 12.01.2015 18:55, Mathieu Arnold wrote: >> > Well, no, there is not, and unless you figure out an algorithm to do= it, >> > and I'm saying algorithm in the mathematical sense, not heuristic, t= hat is, >> > one that is always right, feel free to submit a patch for it :-) >> > Now, there's a good chance that it will be slower than rebuilding al= l the >> > dependencies. > What about the logic in pkg, aren't both programs solving the same prob= lem? No, the problems solved by pkg and poudriere are very different. pkg(8) has the massive advantage that it already has access to the built packages, including analysis of the dynamic linkage of all the binaries included there. That makes it relatively simple for pkg to work out if a change in some dependency has had a material effect on the package being considered. poudriere only knows that the dependency changed. In effect, to find out if the package of interest would be changed because of that, it has no other recourse than to build the package. Now, if you can come up with some heuristics whereby you can examine the changes to a port and determine that they will not cause significant downstream changes, and do that reliably and faster than just rebuilding the package, then I'm sure the poudriere developers would be eager to incorporate them. Failing that, poudriere re-building everything that might be affected is the sensible choice. Cheers, Matthew --=20 Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey --cDbEKkQ0qX8wNtvcwfnX4dbiMbpoG2QAB Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.20 (Darwin) iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJUtMwFXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQ2NTNBNjhCOTEzQTRFNkNGM0UxRTEzMjZC QjIzQUY1MThFMUE0MDEzAAoJELsjr1GOGkATaScP/jVIjyDti9ejXuwUB+hZVwzp 4CbFfc3d1xaphkP4nwJWTMUtlO/CzZNcQqdRpoCbn17CyQsDrItdVyWUQoE4OM2a ioqYKZUgEkIHGuELE+FuqmwAsJdov6QUoJvMOLjaUuTiXZ0KF85b32OqQAct43vi egWCJWRuoiW2E+YDGAXrjvi0h6n7eBTo/2XxEm+Am8dZN+6v/+g/n9cSKjXk2ZwX 7FBjsyJiXAdq/FzFpa18A+lfonUemSATKiDKw/EtBQKzW2Kc4rKpUcWKHPSxd7Iz tm4y3uS3Qfqs10EZM1ZxFn5SY8E0er51a7fYu4AKyoYCmPQcW00uPaDLVbVE2qij Tur9W208cW/Kw9zJl7gZQcr0nXyzvl2dsnTQbGOmTB2dzE2Bn3n76oVjoaGVDG0L 6ZBsKltamn0tw2wBZYHRSrEAZHi9yDjZiV7522m6a62hnbAVLKOnIoR7DWF+99r2 xpfvUH04IBkC7nRqDzwuPuVELQ2tW0aq0CnJzgQw5Chhv64XI18XCp/Qnj6rB+1/ mLSMy0BvKuEy3vaBEZc6ENMBqpP+Bb2C0saJIzEevD9dYiZS2IysPAAt8Z2nrAx1 +xKQYCN6uCKHsc63dTi0v9ahz94J40usPT586Q46KSy2VBUazRtvwE5JsOuvotxz fWnhTAxdX9s62Q2PTGe2 =B+6l -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --cDbEKkQ0qX8wNtvcwfnX4dbiMbpoG2QAB--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?54B4CBF6.70001>