Dan Armak wrote:
On Tuesday 18 January 2005 07:45, Stuart Longland wrote:
The results:
First Run: 36min 15.996sec
Second Run: 22min 56.704sec
Third Run: 2min 56.696sec
That's horrible, yeah. And it makes me say two things:
- We need confcache, because confcache would reuse configure results _between_
packages, so that you ran kdebase's configure once, and then kdenetwork
kdepim etc (and their derived ebuilds) would get cached results. That's 15
times as fast as configuring all of today's monolithic ebuilds without
confcache.
What exactly does confcache do? The above was literally:
$ tar -xjvf /home/portage/distfiles/kdebase-3.3.1.tar.bz2
$ cd kdebase-3.3.1
$ time ./configure --cache-file=/tmp/kdebase-cache
$ make distclean
$ time ./configure --cache-file=/tmp/kdebase-cache
$ time ./configure --cache-file=/tmp/kdebase-cache -n
Isn't the third case what confcache would attempt to do?
--
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| Stuart Longland -oOo- http://stuartl.longlandclan.hopto.org |
| Atomic Linux Project -oOo- http://atomicl.berlios.de |
| - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - |
| I haven't lost my mind - it's backed up on a tape somewhere |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
--
[email protected] mailing list
