> >> The other issue is caching: autoconf 2.50 will, by default, not > >> generate a config.cache, since that has caused too many problems. > > Guido> Leave it as it is unless there are many complaints. > > Agreed. Most machines are fast enough nowadays that the absence of > config.cache isn't a major stumbling block. If they are that > sensitive to the performance reduction, they can install autoconf > themselves and generate a local version of the configure script. Here's another reason why it's fine to leave the cache off by default: most people will build Python only once per directory -- they'll download a version, run ./configure, make, and make install. For them, the cache doesn't help at all. The people for whom it matters are developers using CVS, who need to run configure frequently (e.g. each time a new configure script is checked in). Those people know what they're doing and can do the -C thing if they find it too slow. Personally, I usually do "./configure; make test" in one window and continue deleting email in another. ;-) --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4