Time to abandon recursive pulling of dependencies?

[Stephen Montgomery-Smith]

Alexander Leidinger wrote:
> Quoting Robert Noland <rnoland at 2hip.net> (Wed, 16 May 2007 18:14:01 -0400):
> 
>> On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 16:01 -0500, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
>>> Ok chaps, I think I have it.
>>>
>>> This involves no recursive calls of make.  Furthermore the
>>> dependencies 
>>> it creates are the real dependencies on your system, not what ports 
>>> thinks it should be, because it gets all the information from 
>>> /var/db/pkg.  On my system it takes a second or two to register a port
>>> - 
>>> it takes about the same amount of time whether it has few
>>> dependencies 
>>> or many, except when there are zero dependencies, when it takes no
>>> time 
>>> at all.
>>>
>>> If I get some positive feedback on this one, I'll submit a PR.  You
>>> can 
>>> try it out by typing "make actual-package-depends" as opposed to
>>> "make 
>>> package-depends."
>> Ok, I'm really trying to make sense of these numbers...
>>
>> For gnome2-2.18.1_1 on my -current system...
>>
>> rnoland-ibm% make package-depends|wc -l
>>      362
>> rnoland-ibm% make actual-package-depends|wc -l
>>      294
>>
>> Registered the old way:
>> rnoland-ibm% grep @pkgdep /var/db/pkg/gnome2-2.18.1_1/+CONTENTS|wc -l
>>      176
>>
>> and the new way:
>> rnoland-ibm% grep @pkgdep /var/db/pkg/gnome2-2.18.1_1/+CONTENTS|wc -l
>>      294
>>
>> I put together an awk script yesterday which was very close to the one
>> Alexander posted and got 295... and the diff of the output of my awk and
>> actual-package-depends is much more than a single line, which I also
>> can't yet explain.
> 
> I had a look at it. It is missing those dependencies which are not
> installed. Depending on when this target is used, this is ok or not.
> 
> Some benchmark:
> ---snip---
> [original]
> make package-depends  80.18s user 53.92s system 73% cpu 3:01.53 total
> make package-depends  80.70s user 52.94s system 87% cpu 2:32.25 total
> make package-depends > /tmp/list1  79.58s user 54.28s system 87% cpu 2:32.59 total
> 
> [no AWK]
> make actual-package-depends  4.76s user 7.46s system 57% cpu 21.082 total
> make actual-package-depends  4.87s user 7.34s system 67% cpu 18.019 total
> make actual-package-depends > /tmp/list2  4.58s user 7.60s system 87% cpu 13.942 total
> 
> [AWK]
> make actual-package-depends  3.15s user 7.45s system 85% cpu 12.420 total
> make actual-package-depends  3.13s user 7.49s system 84% cpu 12.524 total
> make actual-package-depends  3.11s user 7.49s system 88% cpu 11.995 total
> make actual-package-depends >| /tmp/list3  3.16s user 7.42s system 89% cpu 11.83 0 total
> 
> [AWK + partly missing (only direct dependencies)]
> make actual-package-depends > /tmp/list4  4.60s user 7.63s system 90% cpu 13.479 total
> make actual-package-depends  4.68s user 7.56s system 87% cpu 13.985 total
> make actual-package-depends  4.58s user 7.64s system 89% cpu 13.594 total
> 
> ...sorting list1 & list2 & list3 & list4...
> 
> % wc -l /tmp/list*s
>      320 /tmp/list1s
>      308 /tmp/list2s
>      308 /tmp/list3s
>      310 /tmp/list4s
>     1246 total
> ---snip---
> 
> Note, there was trackerd running in the background while testing...
> 
> For the difference between the redirected output case: I think the
> gnome terminal needs a lot of time to print all the lines. But still,
> the awk version takes around 3/4 of the time (interesting is the user
> time, not the total time). Stephen's version can be speed up some
> fractions by inserting a break into the first while-loop.
> 
> Attached is my awk-version and the awk version which also includes the
> direct dependencies.
> 
> Bye,
> Alexander.
> 
> 

I think I like Alexander's awk version better than mine.  Alexander - 
can I ask you to submit the PR using send-pr?

Stephen