| 1 |
On Fri, 29 Nov 2002 18:41:12 +0100 |
| 2 |
Per Wigren <wigren@××××.se> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Is it OK to add dev-lang/tcc as a build-dependancy? |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
This makes for a _VERY_ interesting case. I think we should toy with this |
| 7 |
concept a bit, as we can save ~3hrs compilation time (provided your |
| 8 |
results are good, which I have all reason to think) and it's on a |
| 9 |
non-critical package. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
I suggest: |
| 12 |
1) Only use tcc on platforms you have tested it on, so check ARCH and have |
| 13 |
a |
| 14 |
x86? dev-lang/tcc-<version> in your DEPEND. |
| 15 |
2) Only leave tcc in the DEPEND= and specifically exclude it in RDEPEND |
| 16 |
(the assumption I make is that a tcc-compiled binary doesn't depend on a |
| 17 |
tcc runtime); all too often, build-time tools end up in RDEPEND, which is |
| 18 |
completely and utterly wrong. |
| 19 |
3) Depending on how many packages can benefit from tcc, we may want to |
| 20 |
introduce a useflag for it. May, as it increases the total maintenance |
| 21 |
cost of the tree. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Have you done any tests to see how many of the "regular" packages compile |
| 24 |
nicely with tcc ? Can we compile XFree with it ? (Obviously mozilla is not |
| 25 |
a candidate, as it's largely written in C++). |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Kind regards, |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Karl T |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives