Re: maintaining bulk-{small,medium,large}

[David Holland <dholland-pkgtech%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 08:34:50AM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
 > > It is worse than this. Currently rust is implicitly in bulk-small. I
 > > think this is a consequence of libimagequant, which is included by
 > > graphics/gd.
 > 
 > I think rust has to be limited to bulk-large.

Yeah, I agree.

 > > (However, it seems that cmake is getting pulled in as well, and I
 > > think that violates the time budget and we need to reconsider whatever
 > > packages are using it, which I haven't tracked down yet.)
 > 
 > My quick reaction is that cmake is ok in medium and not in small.

Yeah, I'd agree with that too.

 > Perhaps the 1/8/24 needs to be in VAXmips-hours.  I'm not entirely
 > kidding, but that is probably not the right unit.  We definitely should
 > be targetting machines normal people have, not super build boxes.

Well, what takes an hour on a fast build box might take a week or a
month on an sgimips, but realistically the build times will mostly
scale with machine speed and most of the data we have for build times
will come from build boxes.

This is not entirely true because compiler memory usage is only
predictably correlated with build time when you don't have enough RAM.
But unless someone wants to spend time explicitly investigating,
there's not much we can do about it.

-- 
David A. Holland
dholland%netbsd.org@localhost