[PATCH] Cache xkbcomp output

Keith Packard keithp at keithp.com
Thu Jul 12 16:57:12 PDT 2012

Daniel Stone <daniel at fooishbar.org> writes:

> Ugh, please don't do that.  I already get people (validly) complaining
> that XKB is unintuitive enough ...

Yeah, but I don't want to stat 324 files and 26 directories. That seems
like a worse plan.

> You could just do everything under the data root directory, although I
> guess spinning disks might not love that?

Expensive, as you know.

> That being said, I'm not opposed to doing caching given that I don't
> really have any plans to merge xkbcomp in myself right now, but the
> package-manager thing (while attractive) is just a total copout, and
> will only lead to yet more confusion.

How about just stat'ing the xkb directory itself? That would catch
package updates that package the whole thing, and would be only a single
stat instead of hundreds? Or would that be about the worst compromise
possible, where package updates would get caught (which are the easiest
to have clear the cache) while manual changes would not?

keith.packard at intel.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/attachments/20120712/63ef5c82/attachment.pgp>

More information about the xorg-devel mailing list