> On Mar 12, 2018, at 4:32 PM, Konstantin Tokarev <annu...@yandex.ru> wrote: > > > > 12.03.2018, 15:46, "Orgad Shaneh" <org...@gmail.com>: >> On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 1:38 PM, Sree Gowtham Josyula >> <sreegowth...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Hi André & Everyone, >>> >>> Thanks for showing interest in my suggestion. QTCREATORBUG-16246 is >>> indeed almost like what I had intended in my previous mail. >>> >>>> * Would it be enough to have the files on a network share instead of >>>> rsync'ing them? >>>> * Is it really needed to have Clang running on the remote machine? Would >>>> it be enough to have access to the included headers on remote? >>> >>> I think Network share you suggest is a good idea. It solves both of >>> the above issues. With network sharing, we wouldn't need rsync and we >>> wouldn't need to run clang on remote machine. >>> >>> I will refine my initial proposal and put forth a more detailed >>> proposal considering your suggestions and more use-cases asap. >>> If you have any other thoughts and suggestions, kindly let me know. >> >> Hi, >> >> I strongly suggest not to use network share. We tried that several years ago >> (with SMB), and it was awful. Parsing takes forever over the network. >> Working locally and using rsync before build works much better (once you >> have ssh keys set up). >> >> We have a local partial copy of the sysroot, which includes the include >> directory, and the shared libraries that are linked with our application >> (for each platform we support). > > Why not to go further and get full copy and toolchain locally? >
Network share would in a proper setup be the local disk of the compilation server. Also, one cannot copy locally the toolchain if the server is different OS, unless a cross compilation environment is setup, which in itself is a major piece of work. I’d prefer rsync though, as it would be easier to setup the ports/ firewalls etc., plus it would be faster than the network share. In my hypothetical use-case the compilation server is often in a different country, and VPN would be the only feasible network share setup. Just my 2 cents, Harri _______________________________________________ Qt-creator mailing list Qt-creator@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator
