On 11/01/2014 01:04 AM, David Roundy wrote:
I am aware of that argument against copies, but think the simplicity
and portability would benefit from copies (or maybe symlinks). It is
relatively rare that output is much smaller than input, so in the case
of 10GB of input files with many variants, you're already looking at a
huge amount of disk space and very slow build.
David
I'm not sure about Windows (looks like there might be a ReFS filesystem
or something), but btrfs on linux supports copy-on-write copies. This
would save disk space and prevent the original files from being trashed.
Speaking of trashing files though, shouldn't Tup detect and prevent
modifications to existing files anyway?
--
--
tup-users mailing list
email: [email protected]
unsubscribe: [email protected]
options: http://groups.google.com/group/tup-users?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "tup-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
