From owner-freebsd-chat Thu May 3 9:20:16 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mail.wolves.k12.mo.us (mail.wolves.k12.mo.us [207.160.214.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF22337B422 for ; Thu, 3 May 2001 09:20:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from cdillon@wolves.k12.mo.us) Received: from mail.wolves.k12.mo.us (cdillon@mail.wolves.k12.mo.us [207.160.214.1]) by mail.wolves.k12.mo.us (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA97746; Thu, 3 May 2001 11:11:27 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from cdillon@wolves.k12.mo.us) Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 11:11:26 -0500 (CDT) From: Chris Dillon To: Andrew Atrens Cc: Subject: Re: -- recursive make considered harmful ?? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wed, 2 May 2001, Andrew Atrens wrote: > Any considered opinions on this ? > > http://www.pcug.org.au/~millerp/rmch/recu-make-cons-harm.html Excellent. A very scientific approach with good stuff to back it up, instead of "I really think it would just be better this way". I'm not a make expert myself, but I do understand it quite a bit more, and it brings a whole new light to the time it takes to do a 'make world'. :-) By the sound of it, converting the current FreeBSD source tree to use a single makefile might not be as big of a task as it would seem. Once the framework is in place, it should be possible to transition from a recursive make structure to a single make instance over time and not have to be done all at once. Right? (Again, I'm no make expert) The benefits of this could be huge to both the user community and the developers. Imagine a 'make world' that takes just a minute or two (or less?) after you've made a change that could have a potentially sweeping affect on the codebase. The single make instance (as long as the DAG is correct, as you mention) could help developers identify very quickly which other pieces of code their change affected without having to do the currently very long and laborious 'make world' as we know it. The benefits to the general userbase would just simply be quick subsequent 'make world's, and probably a slightly faster initial 'make world' because of fewer forks/etc. :-) Oh yeah, wouldn't a single make instance also totally eliminate any potential problems -- as well as increase the effectiveness -- of doing parallel (-j #) builds? That could be a significant advantage over the current system as well. -- Chris Dillon - cdillon@wolves.k12.mo.us - cdillon@inter-linc.net FreeBSD: The fastest and most stable server OS on the planet. For IA32 and Alpha architectures. IA64, PPC, and ARM under development. http://www.freebsd.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message