On Sat, 18 Nov 2017 02:52:33 +0100 Francesco Riosa <viv...@gmail.com> wrote: > > In my user opinion this has no place in a ebuild unless upstream > clearly say to use (or evidently use) ninja as it main generator.
I think Gentoo deviates from upstreams fairly considerably at times. I see this as case where Gentoo can help facility things to upstream. Maybe they haven't the time to test, etc. Current example https://sourceforge.net/p/firebird/mailman/firebird-devel/thread/assp.04935012e0.20171116111219.18e86899%40wlt.obsidian-studios.com/#msg36117925 > In cases where ninja is considered (by upstream) the best option, > Michael suggestion to make it overridable is a very wise one. > In that case, please also remember to depend on ninja I do not think that is necessary unless it bypasses this case ${CMAKE_MAKEFILE_GENERATOR} in emake) DEPEND="sys-devel/make" ;; ninja) DEPEND="dev-util/ninja" ;; > Since other emails (by Christoph and Brian) in this thread make > evident that it's not a drop in replacement, fixing it in the eclass > seem a bad idea, but that probably should be reconsidered when ninja > become more capable. Only 2 thus far does not sound like most things would have issues. Maybe worth a bug to track stuff that builds fine and things that fail. Could use the math alone to make a final call. More packages fail, stick with make. if only a few, switch to ninja and have those stick with the slow make. Either way up to others. I am just passing on whats going on in many other FOSS projects. Ninja is most of the speed of meson less configure time savings. -- William L. Thomson Jr.
pgpbJ6TtMkfy0.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
