#8950: Consider using ninja to build cmake packages.
-------------------------+--------------------------
Reporter: ken@… | Owner: blfs-book@…
Type: enhancement | Status: closed
Priority: normal | Milestone: future
Component: BOOK | Version: SVN
Severity: normal | Resolution: invalid
Keywords: |
-------------------------+--------------------------
Changes (by ken@…):
* status: new => closed
* resolution: => invalid
Comment:
After trying this, I can generally find no benefit for straight builds.
In some cases (higher-end machines) it might marginally help. But on
lesser machines the default of N+2 CPUs might be slightly harmful. Adding
-v to stop the stdout only using the last line adds detail of the command-
line being run and probably slows things down : piping the command '...
2>&1 | tee somelog' solves the problem without hte extra detail.
On a lower-end 4-core machine, ninja -j4 or default ninja is typically
slightly slower than using make -j4.
The only place where it helped was running the llvm tests - those use a
lot of time building the test progs before then using all CPUs to run
them. Here, make -jN check-all provides a similar improvement.
With hindsight, the reference was for ''developers'' - supposedly,
rebuilding a package after changing one file takes a long time with the
Makefiles produced by cmake (a need to check dependencies of each target,
I think) but is very quick with ninja.
--
Ticket URL: <http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/ticket/8950#comment:3>
BLFS Trac <http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs>
Beyond Linux From Scratch
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-book
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
