Reducing the size of the ports tree (brainstorm v2)

Chris H bsd-lists at bsdforge.com
Tue Nov 4 21:19:42 UTC 2014


On Mon, 3 Nov 2014 21:24:38 +0100 Tijl Coosemans <tijl at FreeBSD.org> wrote

> On Mon, 03 Nov 2014 09:22:09 +0100 Matthias Andree <matthias.andree at gmx.de>
> wrote: > Am 31.10.2014 um 19:56 schrieb Baptiste Daroussin:
> >> Hi all,
> >> 
> >> tijl@ spotted an interesting point, distinfo and pkg-descr files files
> >> convenient are taking a lot of space for "free", we can reduce the size of
> >> the while ports tree by a factor 2 by simply merging them into one of the
> >> other files (Makefile and/or pkg-plist) from my testing it really devides
> >> significantly the size of the tree.
> >> 
> >> Problem is how to merge them if we want to.
> >> 
> >> What we do not want to loose:
> >> - Easyness of parsing distinfo
> >> - Easyness to get informations about the description
> >> 
> >> so far I have not been able to figure out a user friendly way
> >> 
> >> Ideas I got so far only concerns pkg-descr:
> >> Adding an entry in the Makefile for the WWW:
> >> WWW= bla
> >> or an entry in the plist: @www http...
> >> 
> >> for the description the Makefile is not suitable as multi line entry in
> >> Makefiles are painful
> >> Maybe a new keyword:
> >> @descr <<EOD
> >> mydesc
> >> in 
> >> multiline
> >> EOD
> >> 
> >> which could easily be added to the plist parser in pkg. But I'm do not
> >> find that very friendly in particular for make(1) to extract the data.
> >> 
> >> Concerning the distinfo I have no idea.
> >> 
> >> so this mail is a call of ideas :), if nothing nice ideas is found we
> >> will just do nothing here :)
> > 
> > My urgent recommendation is to leave it as is.  Even if it wastes 200
> > MB.  Space is so cheap these days it's not worth introducing new
> > instabilities, re-train all contributors and all that.
> > 
> > We haven't even shaken off all the staging and pkg fall-out, and now
> > we're talking about the next revolution.
> 
> The numbers on http://beefy1.isc.freebsd.org/ and
> http://beefy2.isc.freebsd.org/ have never been better.
> 
> > And if we really decided that we want to change things, we would need
> > these things BEFORE the implementation:
> > 
> > 1. a clear list of the problems.
> > 1a. Space does not count, see above.
> > 1b. Insufficient tools (SVN) do not count.  If the tools are bad, we
> > need other tools, not change our way of doing things.
> 
> Other tools won't change anything.  It's the file system that would
> have to change which is not going to happen.

gpart(8) -a gives you what you need. If it's truly as bad as all that,
mounting the ports tree on a 512k aligned slice will reduce the "slack"
you appear to be referring to. zfs(8) also has this ability.

> When the ports tree was
> created disks were much smaller and file systems were better (still not
> good) at storing small files.  Today disks are much bigger and file
> systems have adapted to that.  Now it's time for the ports tree to adapt.
> 
> Here's another way to look at it.  Suppose that distinfo never existed
> and we always specified file sizes and checksums in the Makefile.  Then
> someone would come along and suggest to do just that, put file sizes and
> checksums in a separate file named distinfo.  Nobody would support that.

IMHO sorting out all the pkg(8) issues still at large, would be more
prudent use of time, and resources. Just saying.

--Chris

> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-ports at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"




More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list