Re: configure -C by default?

[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.

>   Not everybody have the luxury
> of running on the bare OS.  E.g. Cygwin is not very fast at
> running configure and that matters a lot for me since I have a
> number of packages with checks for about the same things and they
> benefit *very* much from sharing the cache.
:=)

The only real world use-case I currently have for config.caches, is it 
being a offering a crude way to override configure settings when 
configure guesses things wrong (A real-world use case: Paths to tools 
when cross-building scripts)

Ralf