> On Aug 27, 2014, at 5:18, Ehsan Akhgari <ehsan.akhg...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 2014-08-26, 11:54 PM, Mike Hommey wrote: >>> On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 11:34:29PM -0400, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: >>>> On 2014-08-26, 6:05 PM, Mike Hommey wrote: >>>> On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 10:40:39AM -0400, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: >>>>>> Well, reading this thread, it doesn't seem mach build dir is broken for >>>>>> the use people make of it, which is to build in a single directory. What >>>>>> people want apparently, is more being able to build a single file or set >>>>>> of files, more than a directory and its subdirectories. >>>>>> And ninja is not going to change anything for people wanting to rebuild >>>>>> a few files when changing a header. In fact, it would likely make things >>>>>> harder for them. >>>>> >>>>> Not at all, quite to the contrary. You can build specific targets with >>>>> ninja just fine, and it's non-recursive and fast and all. :-) >>>> >>>> You can't say "build all things in foo and its subdirectories", can you? >>> >>> I think you can. As an example from the clang's generated ninja build >>> system, they have targets such as: >>> https://gist.github.com/ehsan/02bb4f129e72dad5ee52 >>> >>> Basically I think you are able to define a tree of targets, which can map to >>> the file and directory structure of the source dir. >> >> That's nice, but that doesn't map to what people want here (and we have >> dependencies close to what you pasted here in our build system, but it's >> not exposed). >> >> What you could do, i guess, is have phony targets for directories, >> listing all the corresponding object files. IOW, you won't have that >> working magically without writing code to make it so. Not that it's a >> problem, but it just means it's a use-case you'd have to have in mind >> when writing a ninja backend. Same problem with the make backend. > > Yes, that's true. This is definitely something that we need to support > explicitly. > >> The question then becomes, what is really the usecase people want, >> because they've been relying on weird properties of the build system for >> eons, and expect that to keep working. > > Isn't the use case building the object files in a directory recursively?
I interpret this this use case as building a related set of object files for the purpose of quick/imprecise validation of changes to a specific component. So what you really want is to build specific "modules." Is that accurate? _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
