1 |
Le vendredi 30 avril 2010 à 00:16 +0200, Rémi Cardona a écrit : |
2 |
> Le 29/04/2010 09:06, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." a écrit : |
3 |
> > What actions would you suggest? |
4 |
> |
5 |
> Don't use ccache. We (speaking as a former gnome herd member) have had |
6 |
> countless unexplained bugs due to ccache. |
7 |
> |
8 |
> Now, the gnome procedure for build failures is to ask users to first |
9 |
> disable distcc and ccache before trying to reproduce the bug, and that |
10 |
> solves nearly all the weird issues that no-one else can reproduce. |
11 |
> |
12 |
> Bottom line, unless you're building the same code over and over again, |
13 |
> don't use ccache. And even if you are, don't use it, its cache is just |
14 |
> too easily broken. |
15 |
> |
16 |
> Cheers, |
17 |
|
18 |
Not that countless. Personal experience reports one bug in 8 years of |
19 |
use... Just as was previously mentioned in this thread: |
20 |
* check your hardware |
21 |
* know your FEATURES and howto test failures when some are enabled |
22 |
|
23 |
it's just like any package failing with some gcc/linked/whatever flag, |
24 |
you just don't stop using that flag where it works just because of one |
25 |
package, nor do you stop using gcc. |
26 |
|
27 |
-- |
28 |
Gilles Dartiguelongue <eva@g.o> |
29 |
Gentoo |