Re: ccache for the autobuilders?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Tuesday 02 April 2002 06:17, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 02, 2002 at 03:48:49AM +0200, Paul Russell wrote:
> > Looking at my testing PPC box with grep-available, we have only about
> > 8GB total Installed-Size. So I would expect a ccache of 1GB (the
> > default) to be a net gain, given that not all packages are built with the
> glibc packages total installed size is only a few dozen megs. However,
> the source builds takes up about 600megs. XFree86, about 1.6gigs.
Um, that's wonderful. But does glibc build lots of object files which get
discarded or something?
> There's no way to sanely cache our builds.
I understand that it's traditional for the tone of debian-devel to be
overwhelmingly negative, but in this case I think you have erred.
Building glibc (2.2.5-3) from source results in packages with a total
installed size of 45,296. The ccache stats show a cache size 153,476
which is about 3 times as large.
If this is indicative, a complete debian build would use 24GB, and I
would say that a cache of a few GB would be a win (given not all
packages get built as frequently).
Also, a build farm could be optimized to usually build the same package
on the same machine, optimizing the cache furthur.
Thanks for your mail,
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org