| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Alexander Kuzmenkov <akuzmenkov(at)timescale(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: preserve timestamps when installing headers |
| Date: | 2021-12-06 11:39:04 |
| Message-ID: | 6dc13592-5f31-2f28-a959-c2b9ce9679c0@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 06.12.21 07:51, Tom Lane wrote:
> TBH, I am not convinced that the complained-of case is enough of a
> problem to justify any change in our build rules, even if there
> weren't any semantic issues. If you are worried about build times,
> you should be using ccache, and IME builds using ccache are not
> terribly impacted by file timestamp changes.
I have never heard of a dependency-based build system taking into
account the timestamps of files outside of the source (or build) tree.
It does make sense to some degree, but it seems very unusual, and
basically nothing works like that. I'm also not sure how packaging
systems preserve file timestamps. Maybe it's a thing now, but I'd like
to see a more comprehensive analysis before we commit to this.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2021-12-06 11:41:09 | Re: preserve timestamps when installing headers |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2021-12-06 11:15:22 | Re: preserve timestamps when installing headers |