>Teaching the Ninja generator about response files for object file compilation
>would be the way to go (and support for RC as well would be good since the
>logic is likely the same).
I will time box it and see if I can do it in few days, if not we need to figure
out if it can be done like a
[cmake-developers] ninja/make compilation response file
On 04.04.2016 18:38, Nils Gladitz wrote:
On 04.04.2016 17:59, Dmitry Ivanov wrote:
PS. Can we do something about bloated cmake ninja generator ? in our case cmake
generates 1.8 Mb Makefile and 84 Mb build.ninja, though ninja is still faster
tha
On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 15:59:30 +, Dmitry Ivanov wrote:
> We have a strange situation where we do have too many include paths,
> which makes command line for obj compilation too long on windows (more
> 32kb).
> I've tried using set(CMAKE_NINJA_FORCE_RESPONSE_FILE 1), but
> apparently after
On 04.04.2016 18:38, Nils Gladitz wrote:
On 04.04.2016 17:59, Dmitry Ivanov wrote:
PS. Can we do something about bloated cmake ninja generator ? in our
case cmake generates 1.8 Mb Makefile and 84 Mb build.ninja, though
ninja is still faster than make even in this case.
Curious. Did you
On 04.04.2016 17:59, Dmitry Ivanov wrote:
PS. Can we do something about bloated cmake ninja generator ? in our
case cmake generates 1.8 Mb Makefile and 84 Mb build.ninja, though
ninja is still faster than make even in this case.
Curious. Did you count the accumulative size of all Makefile
Hi everyone,
We have a strange situation where we do have too many include paths, which
makes command line for obj compilation too long on windows (more 32kb).
I've tried using set(CMAKE_NINJA_FORCE_RESPONSE_FILE 1), but apparently after
checking cmake upstream I've realized that it's only
