It seems like the timestamps among just the .zo and .dep files will cause us issues as well due to how Perforce works. When you sync, Perforce sets the timestamp of the file to the time of sync. If I sync all of a Racket distribution my file timestamps will not be coherent from Racket's point of view, right?
As far as I can tell, one of these things must change for our setup to be reliable: - use of precompilation (going without .zos entirely should eliminate this problem) - use of Perforce; with proper timestamps Racket will not complain - the compilation manager; if we change the default implementation to ignore timestamps and just go by file existence we should be ok Does this sound like an accurate assessment? Thanks, Dan On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 7:01 PM, Robby Findler <ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu>wrote: > On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 7:59 PM, Dan Liebgold <dan.liebg...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 5:23 PM, Matthew Flatt <mfl...@cs.utah.edu> > wrote: > >> > >> Is there any chance that the ".zo" file timestamps became earlier than > >> the ".rkt" timestamps on end-users' machines? > >> > > > > Yes that is possible... we're distributing using Perforce, which > timestamps > > files at the time of syncing. Would that give the result I'm seeing? > > > > I'm guessing I should supply a custom compile-manager to ignore rkt > files. > > This is certainly a case where we would like to only care about .zos. > > You could just omit the source files, if you really don't care about > them being there. > > Robby > -- Dan Liebgold [dan.liebg...@gmail.com]
_________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
