[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Testing libsatsolver on Fedora

On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 10:50:22AM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 07/31/2009 10:42 AM, James Antill wrote:
> > 
> >  *sigh*, if you want to do some benchmarking of different package
> > managers available in Fedora (zypp makes the 4th, if apt is working
> > again) then feel free to actually do _a bunch of work_ comparing apples
> > to apples. You'll almost certainly be speaking privately with developers
> > from all of the tools, to make sure you aren't screwing it up. _Then_
> > post the results somewhere.
> Why would the conversations have to be private?
> >  I would be more than happy to help you, with regards to yum, if only
> > because it'd be nice to have _some_ third party results somewhere that
> > weren't completely insane.
> >  If, however, you want to just post "yum is slow" feel free to not do so
> > on f-d-l. Likewise with quick "benchmarks" like this (which amounts to
> > the same thing, IMO).
> You are being needlessly defensive. HWhy not just explain how solv
> update and yum update is that different? It is obvious why people would
> want to compare. If you think, there is a lack of proper comparison, do
> it yourself and post the results or explain the guidelines and ask
> people to run the tests and post the results. Either way, performance of
> yum is a frequently raised point and it would be useful to get some good
> comparisons.

James has written about these before:


Paul W. Frields                                http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
  http://redhat.com/   -  -  -  -   http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
  irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]