Got it - thanks for the clarification! Also, I think I was unclear in my stated concern for new contributors. It seems to me that new contributors could choose to use the -so flag, even if the official pre-merge jobs doesn't, but that there is a cost to diverging from the pre-merge job in that it is hard to know what is to blame if your pre-merge job fails.
On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 5:46 PM, Henry Robinson <[email protected]> wrote: > On 24 July 2017 at 17:43, Jim Apple <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 5:08 PM, Henry Robinson <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > On 24 July 2017 at 17:04, Jim Apple <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > I had anticipated that shared linking would save time and disk space, > > but > > > > it sounds like, from your testing, it doesn't save much time. Does it > > > save > > > > disk space? > > > > > > > > > > I haven't measured but I would expect not. Do we need to be very > careful > > > about disk space in the current configuration? > > > > > > > I don't think so, but since we are trying to entice new community members > > to commit patches, I am concerned about the cost on developer machines. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Does static linking save time when compiling incremental changes? > > > > > > > > > > Again, I haven't measured. > > > > > > > > > I'm confused. You said, "Static linking doesn't take much longer in my > > unscientific measurements". > > > > I am also confused. I spoke about end-to-end builds on > ubuntu-14.04-from-scratch. I haven't measured incremental changes, unless > they're covered by that build. >
