On 5 February 2014 15:59, Todd Fiala <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi all, > > Just thought I'd pass along that I've just did a build time comparison > between our standard lldb build setup: configure + (g)make (i.e. configure && > make -j32), vs. cmake + ninja (i.e. cmake -GNinja && ninja). On an HP z620 > with 32 virtual procs on ssd, it takes me just under 10 minutes to build lldb > with configure/make. The same machine with ninja + cmake takes 4.25 minutes. > *huge* speedup. > > We'll be moving in that direction on our dev setups based on that change. If > for some reason we hit any hiccups with that, I'll be sure to tell you about > them.
I think the configure-based build was (temporarily) broken when I first started working on LLDB and I started using cmake/ninja for that reason; I've never looked back. The speedup is very nice, and I'm quite fond of ninja's output format for files that are built successfully / have warnings / have errors. There's been some discussion in the past on deprecating the configure+make build, but without any further action. For developers still using the configure+make build, is it just because you're unfamiliar with cmake/ninja, or is there some attribute of the make build that you rely on? _______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
