On 01/10/13 13:55, Connor Behan wrote: > On 30/09/13 08:30 PM, Allan McRae wrote: >> On 29/09/13 03:01, Lukas Jirkovsky wrote: >>> Accidentally sent this to a wrong address... I hope forwarding this >>> won't break the patch. >>> >>> --- >>> Hi, >>> This patch adds incremental build support for the packages with VCS sources. >>> It is not complete work (only GIT is supported), but a mere request for >>> comments. If there is a chance that something like this will be accepted, >>> I will extend the support to other VCS, too. >>> >>> Rationale: >>> When someone uses a VCS package, there is a high chance that such user wants >>> to follow the development more closely. This means that the user will be >>> rebuilding the package often. However, rebuilding the whole package takes a >>> lot >>> of time. This can be somewhat mitigated by using ccache. However, the >>> greatest >>> speedup can be achieved by incremental build. The problem is that current >>> VCS >>> support makes this pretty much imposible by removing the cloned sources >>> before building. >>> >>> This patch adds a new option --incremental. Using this option forces makepkg >>> to only update the cloned source directory instead of removing it and >>> cloning >>> anew. This allows make to use the incremental build feature. >>> >>> See also FS#35050 >>> >>> I've been using this patch for a few days with kdevplatform-git and >>> kdevelop-git (not the ones from AUR) at it works great. It already saved me >>> a >>> lot of time, while using nice and clean PKGBUILD (so far I have been using >>> the >>> old-style VCS packages that clone sources in their build() function to >>> achive >>> similar functionality). >>> >>> Any comments are welcome. >>> >>> Lukas >>> >> I have not looked at the patch yet, but my initial impression is that >> the additional flag should not be needed. For non-vcs files, we >> extract the source over the top of whatever is in $srcdir. We should do >> the same for VCS sources. >> >> Why may be worth having a flag for is to delete the source directory >> before starting: >> https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/17175 >> >> Other opinions here? >> >> Allan >> > I would get a lot of use out of an --incremental option. Let's say you > build xorg-server-git, it takes 20 minutes and you install it with > pacman. The next day, an upstream commit changes 5 lines in one file and > you decide to stay on top of things and have your installed > xorg-server-git update to reflect this. Only one file needs to be > rebuilt but makepkg will still make you wait 20 minutes. I've resorted > to make installing untracked files more than once because of this. >
Did you read my comment beyond the first sentence?
