From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 28 23:39:13 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 4EBF1106566B for ; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 23:39:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jamie@kode5.net) Received: from kontrol.kode5.net (kontrol.kode5.net [80.229.5.32]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B148A8FC18 for ; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 23:39:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kontrol.kode5.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kontrol.kode5.net (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q7SNdAf5079338; Wed, 29 Aug 2012 00:39:10 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from jamie@kode5.net) Received: (from jamie@localhost) by kontrol.kode5.net (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id q7SNd9J8079337; Wed, 29 Aug 2012 00:39:09 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from jamie@kode5.net) X-Authentication-Warning: kontrol.kode5.net: jamie set sender to jamie@kode5.net using -f Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2012 00:39:09 +0100 From: Jamie Paul Griffin To: Warren Block Message-ID: <20120828233909.GE78518@kontrol.kode5.net> References: <20120828203130.GB78051@kontrol.kode5.net> <20120828223413.GB78518@kontrol.kode5.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: x-operating-system: FreeBSD 9.1-PRERELEASE amd64 x-pgp-fingerprint: A4B9 E875 A18C 6E11 F46D B788 BEE6 1251 1D31 DC38 x-pgp-key: 1D31DC38 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.97.5 at kontrol.kode5.net X-Virus-Status: Clean 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 23:39:13 -0000 [ Warren Block wrote on Tue 28.Aug'12 at 17:28:15 -0600 ] > 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. Great suggestion, I'll look into that. Although, I am planning a rebuild using clang in the next few days but from what you say it could still be a useful addition. Jamie