[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: converting netkit to autoconf?
From: |
Paul Eggert |
Subject: |
Re: converting netkit to autoconf? |
Date: |
Fri, 13 Sep 2002 09:33:15 -0700 (PDT) |
> From: Bernd Jendrissek <address@hidden>
> Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 17:09:16 +0200
>
> But what happens when the user configures with CC=uglycc-insane-and-buggy?
Any system-wide cache would have to depend on context like that.
A similar scheme has been used by some vendors' C compilers,
which precompile system headers. If you compile with nonstandard
flags then you get a different cache.
Another idea for boosting performance, on multiprocessors anyway, is
for Autoconf to generate a makefile that runs the configure-time
tests. That way, the tests can be run in parallel to some extent.
If we were designing make+autoconf+automake all over again, we'd be
integrating this stuff better, and could get some improvements that
way. I suspect that adding the proper hooks to 'make' could help us
quite a bit even if we don't fully integrate 'make'. It would help if
I had time to read up on what the competition is doing (e.g. Aegis).
- Re: converting netkit to autoconf?, Akim Demaille, 2002/09/03
- Re: converting netkit to autoconf?, Bruce Korb, 2002/09/03
- Re: converting netkit to autoconf?, Paul Eggert, 2002/09/03
- Re: converting netkit to autoconf?, Earnie Boyd, 2002/09/03
- Re: converting netkit to autoconf?, Akim Demaille, 2002/09/13
- Re: converting netkit to autoconf?, Bruce Korb, 2002/09/13
- Re: converting netkit to autoconf?, Bernd Jendrissek, 2002/09/13
- Re: autoconf 3.0?, Bruce Korb, 2002/09/13
- Re: autoconf 3.0?, Alex Hornby, 2002/09/13
- Re: autoconf 3.0?, Bruce Korb, 2002/09/13
- Re: converting netkit to autoconf?,
Paul Eggert <=
- Re: converting netkit to autoconf?, Dan Kegel, 2002/09/13
- Re: converting netkit to autoconf?, Berend de Boer, 2002/09/15
- Re: converting netkit to autoconf?, Christopher Faylor, 2002/09/15