From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 28 23:28:23 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DAE0106567A for ; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 23:28:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from wonkity.com (wonkity.com [67.158.26.137]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 471628FC0A for ; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 23:28:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from wonkity.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wonkity.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q7SNSFTB082000; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 17:28:15 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from localhost (wblock@localhost) by wonkity.com (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) with ESMTP id q7SNSFVk081997; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 17:28:15 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 17:28:15 -0600 (MDT) From: Warren Block To: Jamie Paul Griffin In-Reply-To: <20120828223413.GB78518@kontrol.kode5.net> Message-ID: References: <20120828203130.GB78051@kontrol.kode5.net> <20120828223413.GB78518@kontrol.kode5.net> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-ID: Content-Disposition: INLINE X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (wonkity.com [127.0.0.1]); Tue, 28 Aug 2012 17:28:15 -0600 (MDT) Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Question About Tracking the Stable Branch X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 23:28:23 -0000 On Tue, 28 Aug 2012, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote: > I've always updated my -RELEASE systems using the traditional method > so it seems it's no different other than perhaps updating more > frequently and deciding whether or not both kernel code and userland > code needs to be rebuilt together. > > It certainly seems a bad idea for me as someone with a lot to learn, > to patch specific parts of the source tree and rebuild those parts as > something is bound to go wrong at some point for me. In addition to what others have suggested, the devel/ccache port can seriously reduce world and kernel compilation time by caching results. Stuff that hasn't changed comes out of cache rather than from a recompile. A buildworld every few days usually takes only about a fourth of the time it would take without ccache. Unfortunately, so far it only has this extreme an effect with gcc, not so much with clang. I usually use 4G of cache space; haven't tested to see how much is actually needed. Setting CCACHE_COMPRESS=yes fits more files in the cache. In my tests, there was no speed penalty.