El Domingo, 20 de Mayo de 2007 18:38, Ag. D. Hatzimanikas escribió: > On Sun, May 20, at 08:14 Dan Nicholson wrote: > > A couple things to thing about. > > > > 1. The script would obviously be improved if it was done all in perl > > instead of forking a ton of processes. But that would require one of > > use to know perl :)
I not, for sure ;-) > > 2. We can be smarter about how we log the time to start out with. > > Instead of just taking the output that `time' gives, it would be > > better if there was a value just in seconds. You can do this by using > > the TIMEFORMAT variable in bash or by doing some external timing like > > I did before with perl. The perl timing looks very intrusive, at least to me. It implies replacing a simple "time" call by two "date" plus one "perl" calls, increasing a lot the Makefile size. To set TIMEFORMAT seems a good idea. It could allow to simplify a lot time calculations > Ok, the patch attached, I tried it in the last build and it seems to work. Great. Not tested yet but looks sane. > Please review it for a second before apply it, and feel free to change > it. Well, if TIMEFORMAT is added, it will need some changes to handle the new time format. > I also commented out the REPORT option in the case statement, in > common/libs/func_validate_configs.sh. Only remains to add it to the list of non-validated settings. Many thanks, I will test it ASAP. -- Manuel Canales Esparcia Usuario de LFS nº2886: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org LFS en castellano: http://www.escomposlinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.info TLDP-ES: http://es.tldp.org -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/alfs-discuss FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
