Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 10:08 AM, Lubos Lunak wrote: > On Saturday 10 of September 2011, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 1:22 PM, Lubos Lunak wrote: >> >  Since there (AFAIR) haven't been any actual data presented in the >> > discussion >> >> here are some number for my linux bu

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

On Saturday 10 of September 2011, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: > On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 1:22 PM, Lubos Lunak wrote: > >  Since there (AFAIR) haven't been any actual data presented in the > > discussion > > here are some number for my linux buildbot. Ccache hit statistics from a buildbot is probably t

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 1:22 PM, Lubos Lunak wrote: >  Since there (AFAIR) haven't been any actual data presented in the discussion here are some number for my linux buildbot. no ccache, clean full build real56m2.046s user187m2.925s sys 20m45.332s ccache, empty cache, clean full bui

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:55 PM, Terrence Enger wrote: > On Fri, 2011-09-09 at 14:22 -0500, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: >> >> Now granted, once we can reliably do incremental build, the question >> of the effectiveness of ccache will be much more acute. >> presumable incremental build only try to compi

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

On Fri, 2011-09-09 at 14:22 -0500, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: > > Now granted, once we can reliably do incremental build, the question > of the effectiveness of ccache will be much more acute. > presumable incremental build only try to compile stuff that _need_ to > be compiled and therefore should b

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

On Fri, 2011-09-09 at 14:04 -0500, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: > On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 1:53 PM, Terrence Enger > wrote: > > > > Uh oh. That page is restricted to administrators. > > no it is not. you just need to register to the wiki... but there is no > special restriction on that. Harrumph. I

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

On Fri, 2011-09-09 at 20:22 +0200, Lubos Lunak wrote: > On Friday 09 of September 2011, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: > > Could somebody else, preferably with a somewhat more common system :), post > their results, so that we can compare? I assume the ccache overhead (caused > by I/O I'd say) is exce

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 1:22 PM, Lubos Lunak wrote: >  So if ccache has 0% hit ratio, there is 17% overhead in this specific case. > With 100% hit ratio, 73% is saved. That, if my math is right, means at least > 19% ccache hit ratio is required for breaking even. I'm am gathering numbers, in the m

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 1:53 PM, Terrence Enger wrote: > On Fri, 2011-09-09 at 12:47 -0500, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 12:35 PM, Terrence Enger >> wrote: >> > I notice, BTW, that "How to build LibreOffice" >> > n

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

On Fri, 2011-09-09 at 12:47 -0500, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: > On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 12:35 PM, Terrence Enger > wrote: > > I notice, BTW, that "How to build LibreOffice" > > no > > longer says that we automatically enable ccache if it i

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

On Friday 09 of September 2011, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: > On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Terrence Enger wrote: > > On Tue, 2011-08-30 at 12:56 -0500, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: > >> 2/ I had a spike in IRC questions/confusions from new tentative > >> contributors on that topic, so I wanted to make

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 12:35 PM, Terrence Enger wrote: > I notice, BTW, that "How to build LibreOffice" > no > longer says that we automatically enable ccache if it is found on the > system. >  Should that statement be added back to the

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

Talking about compression of the ccache cache, ... On Fri, 2011-09-09 at 11:35 -0500, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: > > Well, my boxes are usually cpu bound (even with a fully hot ccache) > and I have plenty of space for my ccache, so that is not that clear a > choice to me. So, unconditional compressi

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Terrence Enger wrote: > On Tue, 2011-08-30 at 12:56 -0500, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: > >> 2/ I had a spike in IRC questions/confusions from new tentative >> contributors on that topic, so I wanted to make it as newbie friendly >> as possible. iow a 'just fscking work

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

On Tue, 2011-08-30 at 12:56 -0500, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: > 2/ I had a spike in IRC questions/confusions from new tentative > contributors on that topic, so I wanted to make it as newbie friendly > as possible. iow a 'just fscking work' approach. Cache compression is advertised as saving space i

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 12:56:50PM -0500, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: > On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 12:16 PM, Francois Tigeot > wrote: > > > > Still, this ccache stuff is too clever for its own good IMHO. > > for reference here is the motivations that lead me to do it [Snip all sorts of good reasons]

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 12:16 PM, Francois Tigeot wrote: > On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 12:00:54PM -0500, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: >> > On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 11:57 AM, Francois Tigeot >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> I'm not happy about this commit either: when packaging LibreOffice under >> >> pkgsrc, >> >

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 12:00:54PM -0500, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 11:57 AM, Francois Tigeot > > wrote: > >> > >> I'm not happy about this commit either: when packaging LibreOffice under > >> pkgsrc, > >> it doubles the size of the build tree for no gain in speed. > >

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 11:58 AM, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: > On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 11:57 AM, Francois Tigeot > wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 11:27:05AM +0200, Jan Holesovsky wrote: >>> On 2011-08-08 at 11:33 +0200, Lubos Lunak wrote: >>> >>> > > I've pushed >>> > > http://cgit

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

Hi all, On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 11:27:05AM +0200, Jan Holesovsky wrote: > On 2011-08-08 at 11:33 +0200, Lubos Lunak wrote: > > > > I've pushed > > > http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=57cf026739a3d707378 > > >ca38f59518b018fccca8f > > > > > > This try to automatically use cca

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

Hi Norbert, Lubos, On 2011-08-08 at 11:33 +0200, Lubos Lunak wrote: > > I've pushed > > http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=57cf026739a3d707378 > >ca38f59518b018fccca8f > > > > This try to automatically use ccache when present, unless CC= or CXX= > > was specified by the user

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

On Tue, 2011-08-09 at 21:33 +0200, Christian Lohmaier wrote: > Hi *, > > On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 8:58 PM, Terrence Enger > wrote: > > On Mon, 2011-08-08 at 11:40 +0200, Christian Lohmaier wrote: > >> > >> Not true either. Default ccache size is 1GB, and that is enough when > >> you focus on one b

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

actually the more interesting numbers are: --disable-ccache make clean time make ccache -C --enable-ccache make clean time make make clean time make Norbert ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/ma

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

Hi *, On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 8:58 PM, Terrence Enger wrote: > On Mon, 2011-08-08 at 11:40 +0200, Christian Lohmaier wrote: >> >> Not true either. Default ccache size is 1GB, and that is enough when >> you focus on one branch. (a build uses less than 500MB) > > Just a note about what I have observ

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Terrence Enger wrote: > On Mon, 2011-08-08 at 11:40 +0200, Christian Lohmaier wrote: >> Hi Lubos, >> (snip) >> >> Not true either. Default ccache size is 1GB, and that is enough when >> you focus on one branch. (a build uses less than 500MB) > > > Just a note about

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

On Mon, 2011-08-08 at 11:40 +0200, Christian Lohmaier wrote: > Hi Lubos, > (snip) > > Not true either. Default ccache size is 1GB, and that is enough when > you focus on one branch. (a build uses less than 500MB) Just a note about what I have observed, for anybody who happens to care. I have c

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

> I think this feature is trying to be way too clever. I think I agree with Lubos here. Better to let those who know what ccache is, and who think/know they will benefit from it, decide themselves whether to use it, and exactly how. --tml ___ LibreO

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

On Monday 08 of August 2011, Christian Lohmaier wrote: > On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Lubos Lunak wrote: > > On Monday 08 of August 2011, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: > >> I've pushed > >> http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=57cf026739a3d707 > >>378 ca38f59518b018fccca8f > >> >

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

Hi Lubos, On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Lubos Lunak wrote: > On Monday 08 of August 2011, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: >> I've pushed >> http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=57cf026739a3d707378 >>ca38f59518b018fccca8f >> >> This try to automatically use ccache when present, unles

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

On Monday 08 of August 2011, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: > I've pushed > http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=57cf026739a3d707378 >ca38f59518b018fccca8f > > This try to automatically use ccache when present, unless CC= or CXX= > was specified by the user or --disable-ccache was passe

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

Hi Tor, *, On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 9:28 AM, Tor Lillqvist wrote: > If one of us (cloph) strongly feels that we should use # comments in > configure.in and not dnl comments (well, keywords), and most others (?) > (including me) are indifferent, why don't just change them all in one go then? I do

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

Hi Norbert, *, On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 2:46 AM, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: > On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 7:21 PM, Christian Lohmaier > wrote: >> >> if it's already an alias for ccache, it won't be prefixed with an >> additional "ccace" > [...] > I'm not sure I'm following: are you talking of the case whe

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

If one of us (cloph) strongly feels that we should use # comments in configure.in and not dnl comments (well, keywords), and most others (?) (including me) are indifferent, why don't just change them all in one go then? I wonder if there is some cases where the dnl keyword can not just be change

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 7:21 PM, Christian Lohmaier wrote: > Hi *, > > That's not the point is it is > > if it's already an alias for ccache, it won't be prefixed with an > additional "ccace" > > And that's not the case. > CC is checked for ccache and possibly altered, then gcc version is > checked

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

Hi *, On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 2:08 AM, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: > On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 6:55 PM, Christian Lohmaier > wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 1:21 AM, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: >>> I've pushed >>> http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=57cf026739a3d707378ca38f59518b018fcc

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 6:55 PM, Christian Lohmaier wrote: > On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 1:21 AM, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: >> I've pushed >> http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=57cf026739a3d707378ca38f59518b018fccca8f > > Note on the Mac-OSX case: > The previous check was not to comp

Re: [Libreoffice] ccache support

On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 1:21 AM, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: > I've pushed > http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=57cf026739a3d707378ca38f59518b018fccca8f Note on the Mac-OSX case: The previous check was not to completely disable ccache, but only to check whether --ccache-skip can b