On 02 Dec 2015 20:16, Pierre Tardy wrote: > > i don't think getting rid out of the fs makes sense, but having memcache > > be available dynamically as an additional layer sounds fine. > > It does make a lot of sense for me as I have a high performance network, > which is faster than local harddrive. So I would insist on keeping an > option for memcached only.
that isn't what i meant. i don't care about runtime config options but about (1) the code and (2) build time control. fs should remain in the source and memcache should be an additional configure flag which allows the user to select it at runtime. -mike
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ ccache mailing list email@example.com https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/ccache