On 8/17/07, Randy McMurchy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Clyde Forrester wrote these words on 08/16/07 17:53 CST: > > > One point, it would appear, is that if my working directory is an > > isolated subdirectory, and if it's something experimental which goes > > bad, then I can simply step out of the isolated working directory and > > nuke it from orbit. > > Correct. And if the package is/was well-behaved, then the source tree > would still be virgin. But unless the tarball is quite large (say like > the kernel), then nuking the source tree and unpacking the tarball is > not that big of a deal anyway either.
Uhh, is nuking the source and unpacking the tarball for the kernel for you a big deal? I timed it just a min ago on my AMD Sempron 3000+ (IDE drives, DDR PC3200) system, and it took only 2½ minute... With a reasonable AMD X2 6000+ (SATAII, DDR2 PC8000) system what would it be? 1 minute? > > Now if you are a developer, instead of just an end-user, you may not > be in a position to just nuke the source tree. So building in a > separate build dir is a good thing. > > What it comes down to is personal choice. > > -- > Randy I would prefer a shadow dir ;-) Tijnema -- If this is a mailing list: DO NOT TOP POST! why?: http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html Vote for PHP Color Coding in Gmail! -> http://gpcc.tijnema.info -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
