Re: Can we remove bison output from cvs?

["Kaveh R. Ghazi" <ghazi at caip dot rutgers dot edu>]

 > From: Per Bothner <bothner@cygnus.com>
 >  
 > > I don't have the luxury of getting the sysadmin to install the latest
 > > copy of packageX and don't want to maintain these in my home directory. 
 > > Building egcs already takes up enough space without having 10 other
 > > tools installed in my home dir. 
 >  
 > In that case, test snapshots (which will have the generated files
 > in them), rather than the instanteous state of the cvs archive.
 > Testing the cvs archive is useful to quickly catch new bugs,
 > but in terms of QA it is better to test the snapshots, because it
 > tests what the users will downloading.
 >  
 > The cvs archive is primarily for developers, plus people who want to
 > be on the bleeding edgs.  In both cases, I think it is reasonable
 > to require that people have bison+makeinfo installed.



	It may be reasonable but its not necessary.  What is the benefit
derived which outweighs the simplicity of having the generated files
there already?

Looking back at http://www.cygnus.com/ml/egcs/1999-Jan/0299.html you
only propose doing it, you never state how it would improve things. 




 > > (Again this assumes I don't have the ability to upgrade the system
 > > bison or the quota to maintain my own copy.)
 >  
 > You have a quota big enough for gcc, but not big enough for
 > gcc+bison?  I'm sorry, but that does not make sense.  Add a
 > couple more gcc toolchains, and you will no longer have room
 > for gcc.
 >         --Per Bothner


	No, think of bison+gperf+autoconf+automake+gnum4+texinfo+etc. 
If bison files are okay to remove we've already seen there's a bandwagon
waiting to remove other generated files. 

Then multiply by five platforms, (all five share the same NFS home
directory in my case.) I'm already maintaining a private dejagnu
snapshot for each one and that's 5 * 16Mb right there.  I don't want to
install 5 * (10 other tools) on top of that. 

Then think hard quota vs soft quota.  My hard quota is much larger than
my soft one.  I remove snapshot builds daily.  So the 7 day limit for
exceeding the soft quota never comes into play.  I would have to keep
these tools permanently so its charged against the lower soft quota
amount. 

	Hopefully this makes clear my issue is not just the space for
gcc+bison. :-)  Your proposal would hose me (and I suspect others)
considerably.  Please don't do it. 

		--Kaveh
--
Kaveh R. Ghazi			Engagement Manager / Project Services
ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu		Icon CMT Corp.