Archives
Archives
| From: | Peter Stuge <peter@×××××.se> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-dev@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: cmake + ninja vs autotools | ||
| Date: | Sat, 25 Nov 2017 01:44:05 | ||
| Message-Id: | 20171125013522.GP4167@stuge.se | ||
| In Reply to: | Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: cmake + ninja vs autotools by "William L. Thomson Jr." |
||
| 1 | William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: |
| 2 | > Or uber minimal, can't get much smaller still 5.20s |
| 3 | > https://travis-ci.org/Obsidian-StudiosInc/asspr#L165 |
| 4 | > https://github.com/Obsidian-StudiosInc/asspr/blob/master/configure.ac |
| 5 | |
| 6 | That takes 2.0s here, on quite old hardware, though with primed cache. |
| 7 | |
| 8 | |
| 9 | > #secondsmatter :) |
| 10 | |
| 11 | Yeah! :) |
| 12 | |
| 13 | |
| 14 | > The dependency aspect I agree with 100%. I think even cmake has more. |
| 15 | |
| 16 | cmake itself is the dependency. ;) |
| 17 | |
| 18 | |
| 19 | > Or who cares about end users, its all about saving devs time, no clue. |
| 20 | > #mesonbandwagon |
| 21 | |
| 22 | End users generally consume behind a distribution build process, so |
| 23 | yes, it's all optimization for development time, which makes some sense. |
| 24 | |
| 25 | |
| 26 | //Peter |