Subject: Re: Extreme lethargy when dependencies are missing (part 2)
To: Frederick Bruckman <email@example.com>
From: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 10/10/2001 21:56:25
On Wed, 10 Oct 2001, Frederick Bruckman wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Oct 2001 email@example.com wrote:
> > > Now you're all done with the indefinite recursion hassle. For whatever
> > > top-level target you're doing (fetch, install, package), you simply
> > > run the list, cd'ing to each directory, in turn, and executing it's
> > > non-recursing little brother (e.g. checksum, no-recurse-check-install,
> > > no-recurse-package).
> > ok. So what happens is you still get recursion and duplication because if
> > several of your DEPENDS share a common DEPENDS, then you duplicate some
> > work there. However, since you do it once, you win because only the top
> > level package does it and you can simply do non-recursive targets in each
> > of the (now flattened) DEPENDS. I think I finally understand!
> Great! I think you could save even more time by eliminating duplicates
> as you go, but you have to careful how you do that, in order to
> guarantee that the DEPENDS are done in order (the item on the bottom
> takes precedence).
maybe we could adapt some of the bulk build stuff which does a single
pass through all of pkgsrc to make a complete depends tree which is then
passed to tsort(1) to build in the correct order.