[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: mtime of fresh .go
From: |
Andy Wingo |
Subject: |
Re: mtime of fresh .go |
Date: |
Sun, 18 Jul 2010 15:03:12 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) |
Heya,
On Fri 16 Jul 2010 10:07, address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> commit 535fb833b34dfc3cc11a679d39390b06fd7e9180
> Author: Andy Wingo <address@hidden>
> Date: Fri Jun 5 10:51:21 2009 +0200
>
> stamp .go with timestamp of .scm; a fresh go has same mtime of .scm
>
> * libguile/load.c (compiled_is_fresh): Rename from compiled_is_newer.
> Check that the mtines of the .go and .scm match exactly, so we don't
> get fooled by rsync-like modifications of the filesystem.
>
> When packaging things “normally”, the .go has an mtime strictly greater
> than that of the source file, so checking for equality doesn’t work.
But when reinstalling code from a binary packaging system, sometimes the
mtime can go backwards. In a perfect world target >= source should be
sufficient but this is how all caches that I know of (the gtk icon
cache, the gstreamer registry, etc) do things.
> Also, the code is similar to ‘fresh-compiled-file-name’ in boot-9.scm.
> Do you think they could be factorized?
Tough to tell without a patch ;-) IIRC it's not the same code due to
boot considerations.
Andy
--
http://wingolog.org/
- mtime of fresh .go, Ludovic Courtès, 2010/07/16
- Re: mtime of fresh .go,
Andy Wingo <=
- Re: mtime of fresh .go, Ludovic Courtès, 2010/07/18
- Re: mtime of fresh .go, Andy Wingo, 2010/07/20
- Re: mtime of fresh .go, Ludovic Courtès, 2010/07/20
- Re: mtime of fresh .go, Andy Wingo, 2010/07/20
- Re: mtime of fresh .go, Ludovic Courtès, 2010/07/21