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

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

_______________________________________________
ccache mailing list
ccache@lists.samba.org
https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/ccache

Reply via email to