[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Re: [cdt-dev] Internal builder status
|
Thanks for the feedback, everyone. I'm replying to Chris since this
seems to summarize most responses.
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 09:46:09AM -0400, Chris Recoskie wrote:
>
> My $0.02 is that probably most people that don't already have an existing
> build system they are using would prefer to build using the internal
> builder... if it worked right. There are a fair number of niggling issues
> as you describe that really prevent serious adoption.
>
> The advantage as well for commercial applications is that one doesn't have
> to redistribute GNU make with their product, or request that users install
> it via their own means.
>
> The internal builder is WAY faster, when it works right.
I like "WAY faster". On the other hand, we already are set up to
redistribute GNU make; and faster's no good if it doesn't work :-(
What I'm seeing here is that for an IDE vendor, where customers are
going to throw who-knows-what at your tools, the external builder is
more reliable. The internal builder is a good idea, but not as
reliable. It's a good enough idea that it clearly should be kept, but
no one is currently keeping it in tip-top condition.
Would everyone agree with that summary?
If so, I'll probably get these bugs into bugzilla, and then leave them
be.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery