[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: configure -C by default?

From: Peter Rosin
Subject: Re: configure -C by default?
Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2011 12:39:10 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv: Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7

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"?

You are apparently not getting it, or you are downplaying my use case
deliberately.  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.


reply via email to

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