Re: efficient use of auto-builder machines (was Re: Bug#43787: changed title, and remade the proposed change)
On Tue, Sep 07, 1999 at 06:55:43PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 07, 1999 at 05:38:03PM +0200, Roman Hodek wrote:
> > You forgot the case of recompilations: If default is with -g + strip
> > (as policy currently recommends), a lot of time is wasted on the
> > auto-builder machines.
>
> I think something like the following would work for auto-builder machines:
>
> #!/usr/bin/perl
> # cc cover which removes -g option
>
> for ($i=$j=0; $i<=$#ARGV; $i++, $j++) {
> if ($ARGV[$j] eq '-g') {
> $i--;
> } else {
> $ARGV[$i]= $ARGV[$j];
> }
> }
> while ($i < $j) {
> pop @ARGV;
> $j--;
> }
> exec "/usr/bin/gcc", @ARGV;
>
> [I volunteer to rewrite this in C if anyone cares to use it and doesn't
> want to deal with the overhead of perl.]
Umm, what about libraries that purposely compile -dbg packages? This is a silly
idea, it's not a good idea for the autobuilders to muck around with the way the
package is meant to be built.
Ben
Reply to: