On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 10:41:41 -0800, Brian Harring <email@example.com>
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 04:54:38PM +0100, Torsten Veller wrote:
>> Can we please move the mips profiles from "dev" to "exp" in
>> The ~150 mips development profiles increase the time for a
>> `repoman -d full` run in dev-perl/ from three to five minutes. That is
>> an increase of roughly 66 percent.
>> repoman further prints more than 2000 lines of output for two
> Quick pcheck visibility scan of the full tree, stats follow:
> mips profiles still enabled:
> * 116191 seperate dependency issues, 1 line per profile/dependency
> * roughly 2m39s run time
> mips profiles disabled (leaving mips-irix however)
> * 9550 seperate dependency issues, 1 line per profile/dependency issue
> * roughly 1m54s run time.
> So... mips accounts for about 30% of the pcheck runtime, and *92%* of
> known visibility issues. As for the runtime difference between
> pcheck/repoman, pcheck has some tricks internally to reduce the # of
> profiles it has to scan down to just the unique USE/mask set- I'd
> expect the mips impact to be far larger w/out that trick in place.
> At the very least if it's going to be kept around, experimental or
> not, the number of profiles in use there *really* needs reduction-
> mips has roughly 117 profiles listed in profiles.desc out of 217-
> literally ~54% of all dev/stable/experimental profiles.
I agree, I wasn't sure why so many profiles were added for a dead team
(for all intensive purposes). Seems quite silly to me to leave them as
'dev' status. If a member of the mips team would reply to this thread, that
would be good. (and surprising to me
I would guess that it would be far easier to work in an overlay at this
point. I would also guess that if there are ANY mips users out there that
they would have to use some other ACCEPT_KEYWORDS value because the shape
of ~mips is so...bad.
> Either way, stats to chew on.