free(relpath);
free(option);
continue;
}
That inserted in ccache.c should solve the problem. Please comment on this
also.
regards,
venkat.
On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 3:05 PM, vkr wrote:
> Hello,
> I've
Hello,
I've a question around the function `make_relative_path()' that rewrites
the given path to its relative path, and while doing so,
it converts the given path to the realpath, and then returns the relative
path for the realpath based on the current working directory.
I was wondering why it wa
ly && !conf->read_only_direct)) {
Or even better, if put_file_in_cache returns if we are in
read-only/read-only-direct mode, which should fix more such hidden cases,
in future.
What do you think? Which one is better?
regards,
Venkat.
On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 6:00 PM, Andre
e lookup using the preprocessor mode?
WiIl I just have additional overhead when the next direct-look up runs? I
guess this is the only drawback.
regards,
Venkat.
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 1:51 AM, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
> On 04/09/14 08:32, vkr wrote:> I would like to know if I can avoid
&
Hello,
I stumbled across this thread -
https://lists.samba.org/archive/ccache/2012q2/000879.html which is years
old,
Coincidentally, I did some work along similar lines already, without
realizing there was this discussion about this topic here,
and I appreciate some comments/suggestions on my appro
Hello,
I was wondering why in ccache we are expanding @file
https://github.com/venkrao/ccache-1/blob/59e5244dd79b0fc7df682c8f3c05b778a3d00f91/ccache.c#L1951
Essentially, the arguments that are to be listed in @file are those that
affect the preprocessor.
Is it safe to just not expand the arguments
Hello,
I believe I found a potential bug with ccache that results in cache-miss if
-Bprfix compilation option is used, where prefix specifies where to find
the executables, libraries, include files, and data files of the compiler
itself.
Example, if my compilation command is:
CCACHE_BASEDIR=$PWD c
in the config file on master)?
>
> -- Joel
>
>
> On 10 September 2014 09:57, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
>>
>> On 10/09/14 08:24, vkr wrote:
>>>
>>> Why is that? I mean, when drop preprocessing only when an env variable is
>>> set,
>>> why is
ubbs wrote:
> On 08/09/14 11:37, vkr wrote:
>>
>> If the env variable TRS_CCACHE_NO_PREPROCESSOR_ON_DIRECT_LOOKUP_MISS is
>> set
>> then, I do not run preprocessing, but just fall back to running
>> real-compiler.
>>
>> I see a lot of time saving, and I
}
+ }
+
/*
* Find the hash using the preprocessed output. Also updates
* included_files.
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 2:51 PM, vkr wrote:
> Hello
> First of all, sorry about the typo in the subject/title of my post.
>
> I run ccache in read-only mode itself. But, I still se
gards,
venkrao
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 1:51 AM, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
> On 04/09/14 08:32, vkr wrote:> I would like to know if I can avoid
>> "If there is no match, ccache falls back to running the preprocessor."
>
> The answer is "no", because it is necessary
Hello
The documentation about "direct mode" says:
The current contents of the include files are then hashed and compared
to the information in the manifest. If there is a match, ccache knows
the result of the compilation. If there is no match, ccache falls back
to running the preprocessor. The out
12 matches
Mail list logo
