On Thursday 15 December 2011 00:39:44 Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 5:28 AM, Mike Frysinger <email@example.com> wrote:
> > On Wednesday 14 December 2011 18:43:33 Alec Warner wrote:
> >> On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 1:25 PM, Leho Kraav <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> >> > i'd be really happy if someone took care of
> >> > https://bugs.gentoo.org/150031 :>
> >> >
> >> > "include more info about binpkg in file name"
> >> That is great, but its not a 6 month project...
> > is it though ? i'm inclined to mark INVALID. hijacking filenames for
> > metadata is a tuuuuuuuuuuurrible idea.
> I agree. It's along the same lines as only using file extensions for
> determining the filetype (and we all know how that turned out...). It
> *does* have the advantage of being really fast, though.
it just doesn't scale though (encoding all metadata into the filename quickly
hits filesystem limits on name length), and i think the speed increase is only
to a limit. once you get into larger repos, using the already existing
"Packages" file would be faster. and since that compresses, it should scale a
> Nevertheless, the basic bug is about changing the distfile repository
> format in such a way that a single repo can contain several distfiles
> built with differing build conditions. Putting metadata in the
> filename is only one way of ensuring that.
sounds like the summary needs updating then by someone who has waded through
all the followup comments