autoconf
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: cache directory is not removed


From: Bill Wendling
Subject: Re: cache directory is not removed
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 16:05:44 -0500
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i

Also sprach Steven G. Johnson:
} Earnie Boyd wrote:
}  > So now I run `configure -C' always.  I use the cache files to
}  > determine problem areas of my runtime libraries.
} 
} Bill Wendling wrote:
} > BTW, the removal of automatically generating a config.cache file by
} > default was a bad idea, in my opinion. We actually use that file quite a
} > bit.
} 
} Generating config.cache by default caused recurrent problems with users 
} who would inadvertantly use stale config.cache files.
} 
} The configure script is intended for *users*, who by far outnumber 
} developers and are far less capable of realizing what config.cache is 
} doing.  It doesn't make sense to optimize the uncommon case (the 
} developers, who are perfectly capable of using -C or of modifying 
} config.site to make it the default) at the expense of the common case 
} (the users).
} 
If there's a problem with old stuff being in the cache, then that stuff
probably doesn't belong in the cache.

For our users, they rerun configure to add different options. The generic
checks (for libraries, header files, sizeof types, etc) shouldn't need to
be rerun.

Blasting the whole cache file seems to be to be throwing the baby out
with the bath-water...

Also, note, that "optimizing" things by placing them in platform specific
files isn't 100% portable or forward compatible, which defeats the reason
for using auto* tools.

}  >I don't think you realize the impact of using the cache here.  On the
}  >file utils, on my machine, it means that running automake, autoconf
}  >and autoheader is about 1min long.  Remove the cache, it's three
}  >minutes.
} 
} Running autoconf + automake + autoheader is not a common operation for 
} most developers (autoconf developers don't count!), and in such a 
} context I would argue that one minute vs. three is not that significant.
} 
} Of course, as with all tradeoffs, this is a matter of opinion, and the 
} people who run autoconf are developers so they can more easily deal with 
} whatever autoconf spews.  Still, I think that we should remember that 
} readers of this list are not necessarily representative of autoconf users.
} 
Again, I don't think we should get rid of the cache, just allow us the
option of turning it off if we want...Just for the record, I think caches
are good. But only if you want/need them around.

-- 
|| Bill Wendling                        address@hidden
|| Coding Simian



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]