|
From: | Ralf Corsepius |
Subject: | Re: configure -C by default? |
Date: | Mon, 07 Feb 2011 13:02:54 +0100 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101209 Fedora/3.1.7-0.35.b3pre.fc14 Thunderbird/3.1.7 |
On 02/07/2011 12:39 PM, Peter Rosin wrote:
When you apply config.caches across packages, there is no guarantee that the values stored in a config.cache have the same semantics/meaning.Den 2011-02-07 11:12 skrev Ralf Corsepius:On 02/07/2011 10:02 AM, Peter Rosin wrote:Den 2011-02-07 09:14 skrev Ralf Corsepius:Provided how HW has developed since the discussions from 10 years ago, you cited about, I am actually leaning towards proposing the converse of your proposal: Autoconf toconsider to abandoning config.cache.No, it still needs to be optional.I don't have anything against this. However, it's simply that the overwhelming majority of current packages hasn't been developed with config.caches in mind. And of those which really use it (complex packages such as GCC or GDB) occasionally to get things wrong. So, IMO, the advantage you believe to see on cygwin or mingw is of limited benefit.What do you mean by "believe to see" and "of limited benefit"?
I.e. when trying to share config.caches between packages (esp. independently developed ones),
* you are at risk of _silently_ miscompiling something.* not to gain much, because a configure-script doesn't not honor config.caches (Pretty typical for "modern" configure script using non-standard macros).
These were the aspects I was referring to.
Neither - I am using autoconf for many, many years and am well aware about the benefits config.cache can have, when _carefully_ being used.You are apparently not getting it, or you are downplaying my use case deliberately.
However, in contemporary development on todays, I've rare experienced config-caches to be more of a nuissance but to be of real advantage.
The advantage I see for the packages I care about and regularly work on is very real: the experience moves from the "pain in the ass" category to "bearable" when I enable the cache. I'm not talking about one-time builds on Cygwin, I talking about doing development there.
Well, I would not want to use Cygwin ;) Ralf
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |