Hello Evgenli! I can't answer you scalability question, but I can say that I have personally used tup's out-of-source building feature configurations / tup.config on a small codebase and it works. So that answers your second question; you can keep your Tupfiles next to your sources and still have tup generate your built files in a separate directory if you wish. Do reconsider building in source, though; people still debate about it, but many of the old reasons for an out-of-source build are obsolete if you're using git/tup.
One thing you should be aware of is that the tup community is currently split between the older native parser, and a newer lua based parser; if it is an existing codebase you're building, you might need the power of the lua stuff. I'm curious what project you're considering building, so please share if it's public info! Cheers, Andrew On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 6:35 AM, Evgenii <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello. > I really like what I read about tup, and I am considering tup to be the > next generation build system for a large project. > The project takes thousands of files from possibly hundreds of directories > totaling multiple GBs and produces thousands of files in a dozen > directories, about 10 GB of data. Some files may be 100-200 MB. Dozens of > pre-built tools and Python, Perl, Tcl scripts make inputs -> outputs > conversions (or "compiles"). Certain chunks of processing must be staged > after others. Updates may involve anything from a single file fix to 300 > files changing. Build from scratch may take several hours, but many tasks > could build in parallel. > > *Q1: *I've read some posts about performance issues, particularly with > multicore machines. Can anyone tell from experience, what sort of > performance difference I may expect for this type of a project compared to > building with makefiles? > > *Q2: *Somewhat related question: The outputs must go into the same > directory as the tupfile (I wish it wasn't the case!). To avoid mixing > source and outputs, I am planning to always store tupfile in some > "generator" subdirectory of the related source files. Then I would need to > copy/move the outputs to the output tree, which is where I actually want > them. Copying 10 GB will take significant time, plus extra disk space. > Moving them would trigger full rebuild by "tup upd" next time (I assume). > What is the recommended approach to reduce the penalty in this situation? > > Regards, > Evgenii > > -- > -- > tup-users mailing list > email: [email protected] > unsubscribe: [email protected] > options: http://groups.google.com/group/tup-users?hl=en > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "tup-users" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- -- tup-users mailing list email: [email protected] unsubscribe: [email protected] options: http://groups.google.com/group/tup-users?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "tup-users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
