1.6Gb of workdir/.../Dep - thoughts ...

[Rob Snelders]

Hi All,

I want to add that the buildspeed and disksize does matter. Not 
everybody who wants to help can afford the newest machines.

--
Greetings,
Rob Snelders

Op 04-06-12 19:53, Michael Meeks schreef:
> Hi Bjoern,
>
> On Mon, 2012-06-04 at 17:19 +0200, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
>> But concat-deps is _after_ the creation dep files of the objects (which will
>> then still be huge).
> 	Sigh; true - it'll mostly speedup build time then; then again we could
> filter them during / after generation I suppose.
>
>>> - a significant part of .d content is the depend-on-nothing deps created
>>> by -MP , if those would be merged into one dedicated .d file that'd save a
>>> lot of space as well; not sure if this is easily doable though
>> Arent we doing that already when merging the .d files for one library?
> 	Right; that is done already as we merge to a library.
>
>> Note however, that every bit of added complexity to the build system will bite
>> you back one day. Currently the Deps are ~10% of the working directory -- even
>> if you reduce them by 90%(*)
> 	Why do you think that Deps are 10% of the working directory ?
>
> $ du -m workdir/unxlngi6.pro | tail -n 1
> 2906	unxlngi6.pro
> $ du -m workdir/unxlngi6.pro/Dep | tail -n 1
> 1546	unxlngi6.pro/Dep
>
> 	For me that reads>  50% of the size.
>
>> So right now, I consider the topic premature optimization until proven otherwise.
> 	Is my workdir abnormally different to yours ? it's normal to have>
> 1.5Gb of 'stuff' in there I think - at least someone I sanity checked
> with saw that too - IMHO it's too big.
>
> 	ATB,
>
> 		Michael.
>