FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Gentoo > Gentoo User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 05-01-2008, 07:11 PM
 
Default checking for.....

In the middle of doing a major upgrade from very old pkgs to current
2008 and compiling lots and lots of stuff.

Seeing that line `checking for WHATEVER' go by 486,211 times so far
makes me wonder if there wouldn't be someway to cache all those
answers somewhere so whatever test is done for each line could be
dispensed with for most of them. Probably would need more than 2-3
compiles to have all but rare ones answered.

Some items really check a lot of things.

I think it would be a major time saver when discussing huge numbers
of compiles.


--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 
Old 05-01-2008, 07:21 PM
"Brandon Mintern"
 
Default checking for.....

On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 3:11 PM, <reader@newsguy.com> wrote:
> In the middle of doing a major upgrade from very old pkgs to current
> 2008 and compiling lots and lots of stuff.
>
> Seeing that line `checking for WHATEVER' go by 486,211 times so far
> makes me wonder if there wouldn't be someway to cache all those
> answers somewhere so whatever test is done for each line could be
> dispensed with for most of them. Probably would need more than 2-3
> compiles to have all but rare ones answered.
>
> Some items really check a lot of things.
>
> I think it would be a major time saver when discussing huge numbers
> of compiles.
>
>
> --
> gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

I had thought the same thing myself some time ago, and I discovered
that there had been work on a FEATURE called confcache. I believe it
was abandoned, though, due to major difficulties. This is merely a
guess, but I think some of the problems arise in that some of the
things that are checked for actually change as a package is installed
or updated (e.g. checking gcc version). This means that each package
being installed would have to somehow flag confcache and indicate that
it has changed, and confcache would have to keep a list of all these
cached values and their dependencies.

I think there might be potential, however, for something that cached
some of the more common system checks such as number of command line
arguments. Then again, if many of these configuration items are
discovered through a simple system call or by running a quick command,
I'm not sure how much faster something like confcache would actually
be.
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 
Old 05-01-2008, 08:54 PM
Alan McKinnon
 
Default checking for.....

On Thursday 01 May 2008, reader@newsguy.com wrote:
> In the middle of doing a major upgrade from very old pkgs to current
> 2008 and compiling lots and lots of stuff.
>
> Seeing that line `checking for WHATEVER' go by 486,211 times so far
> makes me wonder if there wouldn't be someway to cache all those
> answers somewhere so whatever test is done for each line could be
> dispensed with for most of them. Probably would need more than 2-3
> compiles to have all but rare ones answered.
>
> Some items really check a lot of things.
>
> I think it would be a major time saver when discussing huge numbers
> of compiles.

You are expecting autoconf to actually do something sane when it runs???

Har har.
You must be new here.

:-)

That problem has been discussed about 486,212 times and solved about 0
times.


--
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 
Old 05-01-2008, 09:16 PM
 
Default checking for.....

Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> writes:

> You are expecting autoconf to actually do something sane when it runs???
>
> Har har.
> You must be new here.

hehe... no not new... you'd never know it by the questions I ask but
I've been running linux since redhat 3 series circa 1995-6 or so.

I probably shouldn't admit it though.. It seems like there are
getting to be sharper and sharper newish users here.

Just a very slow learner... or as some have said... not the sharpest tool
in the shed.

But thinking it over a bit after the other response I can see where it
would be really difficult to cache that output.... I hadn't really
considered that packages may change the answers frequently.

--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 
Old 05-01-2008, 09:35 PM
Uwe Thiem
 
Default checking for.....

On Thursday 01 May 2008, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On Thursday 01 May 2008, reader@newsguy.com wrote:
> > In the middle of doing a major upgrade from very old pkgs to
> > current 2008 and compiling lots and lots of stuff.
> >
> > Seeing that line `checking for WHATEVER' go by 486,211 times so
> > far makes me wonder if there wouldn't be someway to cache all
> > those answers somewhere so whatever test is done for each line
> > could be dispensed with for most of them. Probably would need
> > more than 2-3 compiles to have all but rare ones answered.
> >
> > Some items really check a lot of things.
> >
> > I think it would be a major time saver when discussing huge
> > numbers of compiles.
>
> You are expecting autoconf to actually do something sane when it
> runs???
>
> Har har.
> You must be new here.
>
> :-)
>
> That problem has been discussed about 486,212 times and solved
> about 0 times.

Fortunately, more packages go over to cmake. Just a matter of time.

Uwe

--
Ignorance killed the cat, sir, curiosity was framed!
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 
Old 05-02-2008, 08:49 AM
Wolf Canis
 
Default checking for.....

reader@newsguy.com wrote:

In the middle of doing a major upgrade from very old pkgs to current
2008 and compiling lots and lots of stuff.

Seeing that line `checking for WHATEVER' go by 486,211 times so far
makes me wonder if there wouldn't be someway to cache all those
answers somewhere so whatever test is done for each line could be
dispensed with for most of them. Probably would need more than 2-3
compiles to have all but rare ones answered.

Some items really check a lot of things.

I think it would be a major time saver when discussing huge numbers
of compiles.





Hello,
"ccache" does caching, I use it and I'm very satisfied.

W. Canis
 
Old 05-02-2008, 08:59 AM
"Brandon Mintern"
 
Default checking for.....

ccache caches the compile step. I believe the OP was specifically
looking for something that would cache the answers to the "checking
for...." lines (the configuration step).

On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 4:49 AM, Wolf Canis <wolf.canis@googlemail.com> wrote:
> [snip]
>
> Hello,
> "ccache" does caching, I use it and I'm very satisfied.
>
> W. Canis
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 
Old 05-02-2008, 09:25 AM
Wolf Canis
 
Default checking for.....

Brandon Mintern wrote:

ccache caches the compile step. I believe the OP was specifically
looking for something that would cache the answers to the "checking
for...." lines (the configuration step).


Yes, you are right, but I thought that ccache cached parts of the
configuration too.
That's what I noticed in outputs during the build process. Perhaps my
conclusion

is wrong.

W. Canis
 
Old 05-02-2008, 11:10 AM
David Relson
 
Default checking for.....

On Fri, 02 May 2008 11:25:41 +0200
Wolf Canis wrote:

> Brandon Mintern wrote:
> > ccache caches the compile step. I believe the OP was specifically
> > looking for something that would cache the answers to the "checking
> > for...." lines (the configuration step).
>
> Yes, you are right, but I thought that ccache cached parts of the
> configuration too.
> That's what I noticed in outputs during the build process. Perhaps my
> conclusion
> is wrong.
>
> W. Canis

As part of identifying the capabilities and files of your operating
system (distro) ./configure creates a lot of small programs and
compiles them. I can see how caching compilation info would help with
this.
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 
Old 05-02-2008, 07:15 PM
"b.n."
 
Default checking for.....

Brandon Mintern ha scritto:

I had thought the same thing myself some time ago, and I discovered
that there had been work on a FEATURE called confcache. I believe it
was abandoned, though, due to major difficulties. This is merely a
guess, but I think some of the problems arise in that some of the
things that are checked for actually change as a package is installed
or updated (e.g. checking gcc version). This means that each package
being installed would have to somehow flag confcache and indicate that
it has changed, and confcache would have to keep a list of all these
cached values and their dependencies.


What was the problem with that? Ebuilds of stuff like gcc could be
tailored to flag confcache. Otherwise, emerge could do the relevant
checks before emerging the first package, and be trained to do them
again after a known "troublesome" package has been emerged.


I understand this requires coordination and maintaining, of course, and
that's the non-trivial part, I guess. However, are there many packages
affecting common configure checks? If they are, say, less than 10
affecting 80% of configure flags, it seems worth the hassle. If troubles
arise, one can quickly try with confcache disabled, and debug.


Heck, I'd help with it myself, if only I had some confidence with
portage code and C compilation (However, I know Python, FWIW)


m.


--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:05 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org