Summary: | [PATCH] global updates mtime check should be not so strict | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Portage Development | Reporter: | Marius Mauch (RETIRED) <genone> |
Component: | Core | Assignee: | Portage team <dev-portage> |
Status: | RESOLVED WONTFIX | ||
Severity: | trivial | Keywords: | Inclusion |
Priority: | High | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | All | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Attachments: | Patch to compare the update list with already applied updates |
Description
Marius Mauch (RETIRED)
2004-01-10 12:15:15 UTC
backwards/forwards isn't a good reason. If you want to make it account for all portdirs, then feel free. Created attachment 23654 [details, diff]
Patch to compare the update list with already applied updates
How about this (checking the actual contents) ? Should also give a nice speedup
in general as we don't apply the whole file but only the parts that weren't
done in a previous run.
Marius... thoughts on this? on what? Anything going on here? This might not be worth doing anything about now since the global updates code is much more efficient since portage-2.1 or so. (In reply to comment #6) > This might not be worth doing anything about now since the global updates > code is much more efficient since portage-2.1 or so. Also, you can use --package-moves=n to disable global updates if you want. I set this in EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS so that then just use --package-moves=y when I want the moves. |