On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 09:53:02 -0600 Andrew Deason <[email protected]> wrote:
> You can (usually) have the sources in AFS, and have the resultant > binaries in AFS, without having to build in AFS. Yes, our buildsystem does support that, too. And I'm doing it this way whenever feasible. > I'm just mentioning that, not to solve your current problem, but if > users want their compiles to not be so slow... but there's many > situations where you can't do that, as Patty mentioned, and some > source trees just plain don't support it, etc etc. I have two reasons to put binaries directly on to AFS: * being able to access the same binaries from different machines on the fly * put source code plus binaries as a package on a central, publicly accessible place where people can refer too it when required. This is useful for example when core dumps from customers are coming in which were created from a specific software version. Then it is neat to be able to have all binaries, source code and symbols from that version Best regards, Matthias -- Matthias Gerstner, Dipl.-Wirtsch.-Inf. (FH), Senior Software Engineer e.solutions GmbH Am Wolfsmantel 46, 91058 Erlangen, Germany Registered Office: Pascalstr. 5, 85057 Ingolstadt, Germany Phone +49-8458-3332-672, mailto:[email protected] Fax +49-8458-3332-20672 e.solutions GmbH Managing Directors Uwe Reder, Dr. Riclef Schmidt-Clausen Register Court Ingolstadt HRB 5221 _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
