Re: [Compilercache-general] Hmm, an idea came up my mind...

[Erik T. <er...@er...>]

hi!


On Wed, Oct 17, 2001 at 12:00:00AM +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> it's been a bit silent here. anyway, what about this:
:-)

> We save some additional Info, e.g. into the filename
> (l234k5j2l34j234-gcc-3.0.1-kernel-2.4.10), so that after a
> compilerupdate (which is due to end of Oct, gcc-3.0.2), an simple
> perlscript can clean up the files from a specific compilerversion.

well. this would at least mean another file per .o file. or the .o
file won't be a .o file anymore but for example a .tar archive with
your information and a .o file in it. or a directory with your info
and the .o file inside. but all those ideas don't seem to be real
simple :)

> So, why not just delete all files when the new compiler arrives?
> Would work for me, but some want to keep two compilers at one
> (e.g. gcc-3.0.x and gcc-2.x), which can be pretty useful, since not
> all progs compile with the new gcc. Or with networked or shared
> cache, you can't just delete all files, but you CAN perhaps delete a
> specific compiler version.
>
> Another example would be optimizer flags. When I sell my athlon and
> buy a whatever comes next, I have no use for cached athlon-optimized
> files.
> 
> What do you think?

well. if you delete all files not accessed the last 10 weeks, the old
stuff from old compilers will disappear automatically. your idea is
like saying the web proxy cache should delete all webpages of provider
A, if the user switched to provider B. but what happens in reality is
the old stuff from provider A will be removed because nobody uses it
anymore. i don't consider it a good idea to add complexity here.

cu
erik

-- 
Name:  Erik Thiele                                        \\\\
Email: er...@er...                                 o `QQ'_
WWW:   http://www.erikyyy.de/                              /   __8
                                                           '  `