Skip to main content

[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

Daniel Jacobowitz

Back to the top