On Thu, 2007-07-12 at 20:37 -0400, Theodore Tso wrote: > I could use separate trees, I suppose, but then I have to keep > multiple copies of the .o files around in all of those separate trees, > and it's cheaper and more efficient to keep them in the ccache cache > IMHO. And with 7200 RPM laptop drives and dual core processors > combined with ccache, I hardly notice the rebuild/relink time. I'm not entirely sure why it would be cheaper and more efficient to keep your object files in ccache rather than in the build tree. It takes time for ccache to do the preprocessing and fetch them, and it takes even more time to redo the linking. Disk space is cheap too, and you can always 'make clean' or even remove all the source files too, if you really care. Not that I'm presuming to suggest that there's anything _wrong_ with your choice of workflow, of course -- it just doesn't really make much sense to me. Branches just seem like a source of complexity and hence pain. Using git was just starting to become sensible for newbies, and now when people are forced to deal with multiple branches it's all horribly painful again. -- dwmw2 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
