On wto, 2017-03-21 at 17:55 +0100, Alexis Ballier wrote: > On Tue, 21 Mar 2017 17:30:29 +0100 > Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > On wto, 2017-03-21 at 17:05 +0100, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > > On Tue, 21 Mar 2017 16:46:43 +0100 > > > Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > > > > > Use --cache-file to reuse the previous check results in the > > > > subsequent configure script runs. This gives a major speed > > > > advantage (beating the previous parallel runs) and significant > > > > CPU savings. > > > > > > Just in case (didn't try nor do I know the reasons of this), but I > > > think this change deserves a round in ~arch: > > > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=162875 > > > > confcache is a completely different business. The problem with > > confcache is that it uses persistent, global cache for lots of > > packages, which can easily get stale or provide corrupted data. Using > > local cache is usually safe (except for very broken packages). > > > yes you're right, but that still doesn't justify pushing straight to > stable for a package in @system > (the same applies to the other patches)
If you really believe users should suffer a 30-minute rebuild for a build-time fix, sure. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
