Bug 38131 – Using timestamps to improve sync time

• Product: Portage Development
• Status: VERIFIED LATER

[Description Pieter De Wit 2004-01-13 19:38:06 UTC]

Hey Guys,

How about using timestamp on every cat. to check if it should be downloaded. You guys are already doing it for the entire tree - why not take it one step better and use the same methode per cat. (like dev-perl,x11-base etc)



Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.

[Comment 1 Pieter De Wit 2004-12-30 20:30:33 UTC]

aaaaawwwww I am not even assigned at the year is almost past...

[Comment 2 Marius Mauch (RETIRED) 2005-01-01 10:02:51 UTC]

happier?

[Comment 3 Brian Harring (RETIRED) 2005-02-27 23:39:46 UTC]

I'd wonder how much of a gain there is to doing per category?
It's doable I spose, but it seems like a potential pita if/when categories go N depth instead of single category namespace.

Dunno.  I'd rather see a different solution, considering the fact that w/ this solution, maybe 5-10 categories don't get sync'd, but a lot of extra work is involved...

[Comment 4 Jason Stubbs (RETIRED) 2005-07-28 07:25:09 UTC]

Putting a hold on feature requests for portage as they are drowning out the 
bugs. Most of these features should be available in the next major version of 
portage. But for the time being, they are just drowning out the major bugs and 
delaying the next version's progress. 
 
Any bugs that contain patches and any bugs for etc-update or dispatch-conf can 
be reopened. Sorry, I'm just not good enough with bugzilla. ;) 

[Comment 5 Marius Mauch (RETIRED) 2007-01-11 12:36:44 UTC]

I think this is WONTFIX, the overhead isn't worth it.

[Comment 6 Zac Medico 2007-01-11 19:25:11 UTC]

I think what's really needed it a new sync method that combines together the best features of rsync and emerge-delta-webrsync.