On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 5:21 PM, bjoern michaelsen - Sun Microsystems - Hamburg Germany <[email protected]> wrote:
> Mu. As long as you have a recursive build process, you have a lot of > implicit dependencies and those are hurting parallelization. On top of > that, process instantiation and file-I/O is very, very expensive on > Windows, the slowest and most problematic platform of all (both are used > extensively when doing recursion). This might not matter too much for a > full build that package maintainers usually do. But it matters very > much for the change->rebuild->change-cycle that devs usually do (Both > implicit deps and recursion over mostly noop build tasks really hurt > here). There has been much speculation on the performances but very little hard facts. It seems to me that the most sensible way to proceed is for someone familiar with the Windows side of things (i.e. not me) to actually measure the build times. Since my CMake test only builds a subset of OOo, the other systems need to be limited to that as well. Of the top of my head, I can think of the following tests to compare: Existing build.pl/dmake The Gnu Make thing CMake with MSVC (MSBuild) generator CMake with MinGW makefile generator The code for all these exist, though CMake may need some platform adaptation. Without measurements any further discussion on performance only makes innocent electrons die in vain. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
