[ccache] Re: [REGRESSION] Recent change to kernel spikes out
sam at ravnborg.org
Tue Jan 6 17:48:25 GMT 2009
On Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 12:33:00PM -0500, Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 03:29:35PM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >>> "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso at mit.edu> 06.01.09 16:15 >>>
> > >In the short term, though, it would be nice if we could get back a
> > >simple way of making a kernel object file using just cc, so that ccache
> > >and distcc could be functional again. Does that seem reasonable?
> > Making the new logic dependent on a config option would seem reasonable
> > to me - of course at the expense of the respective Makefile becoming
> > even less readable.
> Too late. :-) It's pretty unreadable already....
I'm all ears for inputs how to make them even a little more readable.
We actually used several iteratiosn of Jan's patch just to improve
readability in areas the patch touched.
I think at least half of the unreadability comes from the fact that
people do not realise the steps needed to actually build the kernel.
It is a little bit more involved than doing a simple sequence
of gcc; ld.
We have btw. 1140 Makefiles in the kernel of a total of 28000 lines.
Yes - exactly 28000 lines as reported by:
find -name 'Makefile*' | xargs cat | wc -l
But numbers aside - any inputs appreciated.
More information about the ccache