On Thu, Aug 30, 2018, at 6:28 PM, Michael Shal wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 6:04 PM, Michael Shal wrote:
> >
> >
> > In this case, the 99:44 rebuild times look to be an artifact of how the
> > outputs of GenerateServoStyleConsts.py are consumed by a large chunk of the
> > Rust and C++ code.
On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 6:04 PM, Michael Shal wrote:
>
>
> In this case, the 99:44 rebuild times look to be an artifact of how the
> outputs of GenerateServoStyleConsts.py are consumed by a large chunk of the
> Rust and C++ code. Attached is a graphviz .dot file for reference (with
> graphviz,
On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 11:36 AM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> On 8/29/18 10:32 AM, Ted Mielczarek wrote:
>
>> so it's possible that there are things here that are artifacts of our tup
>> build implementation.
>>
>
> Worth keeping in mind, thank you. Would that possibly account for the
>
On 8/29/18 10:32 AM, Ted Mielczarek wrote:
so it's possible that there are things here that are artifacts of our tup build
implementation.
Worth keeping in mind, thank you. Would that possibly account for the
exactly-the-same 99:44 rebuild times for a number of files?
Reading through this
On Wed, Aug 29, 2018, at 9:08 AM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> > https://taskcluster-artifacts.net/CLtUuQugTjKONONL4hh5Nw/0/public/14day_report.html
>
> So my main conclusion from looking at this data is that anything that
> causes us to rebuild any rust stuff is just painful...
I don't think that's
https://taskcluster-artifacts.net/CLtUuQugTjKONONL4hh5Nw/0/public/14day_report.html
So my main conclusion from looking at this data is that anything that
causes us to rebuild any rust stuff is just painful...
-Boris
___
dev-platform mailing list
6 matches
Mail list logo
