Re: [webkit-dev] Using ninja (was Re:Common build system (was Re: WebKit Wishes))
The short answer is, you can't. The fastest path is probably to get a working set of gyp files for the apple mac wk2. I'm going to start working on this just to see how far of we are (Adam's work from a year or two ago had JSC and WebCore building, but wasn't too functional beyond that; even so, it's probably a good starting point). -- Dirk On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Dean Jackson d...@apple.com wrote: OK, this sounds fantastic. And I've noticed how much faster Chromium incrementally builds using ninja when I've done that. So, ignoring the discussion of a single build system for a moment, how can I, as a developer using the OS X + WK2 port, living mostly in Xcode for editing and debugging, use ninja? I need the idiot's guide :) (Note: I am an idiot, but not so much an idiot to realise that the answer involves lots of work and probably updating some old GYP files that you and Adam were testing with, etc etc. I'm just selfishly thinking that cutting even 30s off each incremental rebuild would make me so much happier that I'd be willing to put up with other inconveniences.) Dean On 03/02/2013, at 4:54 PM, Eric Seidel e...@webkit.org wrote: +1 Ninja is beyond-words amazing. http://martine.github.com/ninja/ For better or worse, it is not designed to use human-editable build files, but rather to be used by a meta build system, like GYP or CMake. So using ninja is really an orthogonal discussion to the single build system discussion for WebKit. :) Were the WebKit project to convert to using a single meta-build system, ninja would become an option many users might choose. I'm told most Chromium hackers have GYP set to output ninja files these days, with the exception of some folks who still want the MSVC build environment. For WebKit ports already using CMake, they should definitely try ninja today! Anyway, my wish was not about arguing for a specific build solution. I'm instead noting that for the project to continue to move quickly, we need to stop needing to edit 8 build systems for every file move/addition. Whether that's GYP or CMake or something else, I don't really care. Adam and I tried GYP-for-WebKIt a while back. But any of these solutions will require buy-in from Apple, as they will have to do the largest amount of work converting to use something other than XCode. On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 8:20 PM, Nico Weber tha...@chromium.org wrote: On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 4:58 PM, Adam Barth aba...@webkit.org wrote: Ninja has extremely fast incremental builds and can be generated by GYP. Here are some stats from a year ago: https://plus.google.com/101038813433650812235/posts/irc26fhRtPC Ninja has gotten even faster since then. If you're interested in trying it out, you can play around with incremental builds of the Chromium port on Mac or Linux. You can also look at the build output from the chromium bots. Empty build in 1s: http://build.webkit.org/builders/Chromium%20Linux%20Release/builds/66807/steps/compile-webkit/logs/stdio Build with a few files changed in 15s: http://build.webkit.org/builders/Chromium%20Linux%20Release/builds/66800/steps/compile-webkit/logs/stdio …and this is on fairly slow bots. On my SSD-equipped laptop, I can do incremental rebuilds of all of chrome after touching one (cpp or mm) file in 2-6s. ___ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev ___ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
Re: [webkit-dev] Using ninja (was Re:Common build system (was Re: WebKit Wishes))
Editing seems OK if we use GYP or CMake. You can generate both Xcode and Ninja files against same source tree. Debugging won't work though, at least for GYP-generated projects. Its Ninja and Xcode builds have different directly structure. If Xcode can attach gdb/llldb to an out-of-project executable for debugging, it might work. The dwarf debug metadata points the same source code after all. But I have no idea whether it is possible. -- morrita On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 5:25 AM, Dirk Pranke dpra...@chromium.org wrote: The short answer is, you can't. The fastest path is probably to get a working set of gyp files for the apple mac wk2. I'm going to start working on this just to see how far of we are (Adam's work from a year or two ago had JSC and WebCore building, but wasn't too functional beyond that; even so, it's probably a good starting point). -- Dirk On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Dean Jackson d...@apple.com wrote: OK, this sounds fantastic. And I've noticed how much faster Chromium incrementally builds using ninja when I've done that. So, ignoring the discussion of a single build system for a moment, how can I, as a developer using the OS X + WK2 port, living mostly in Xcode for editing and debugging, use ninja? I need the idiot's guide :) (Note: I am an idiot, but not so much an idiot to realise that the answer involves lots of work and probably updating some old GYP files that you and Adam were testing with, etc etc. I'm just selfishly thinking that cutting even 30s off each incremental rebuild would make me so much happier that I'd be willing to put up with other inconveniences.) Dean On 03/02/2013, at 4:54 PM, Eric Seidel e...@webkit.org wrote: +1 Ninja is beyond-words amazing. http://martine.github.com/ninja/ For better or worse, it is not designed to use human-editable build files, but rather to be used by a meta build system, like GYP or CMake. So using ninja is really an orthogonal discussion to the single build system discussion for WebKit. :) Were the WebKit project to convert to using a single meta-build system, ninja would become an option many users might choose. I'm told most Chromium hackers have GYP set to output ninja files these days, with the exception of some folks who still want the MSVC build environment. For WebKit ports already using CMake, they should definitely try ninja today! Anyway, my wish was not about arguing for a specific build solution. I'm instead noting that for the project to continue to move quickly, we need to stop needing to edit 8 build systems for every file move/addition. Whether that's GYP or CMake or something else, I don't really care. Adam and I tried GYP-for-WebKIt a while back. But any of these solutions will require buy-in from Apple, as they will have to do the largest amount of work converting to use something other than XCode. On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 8:20 PM, Nico Weber tha...@chromium.org wrote: On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 4:58 PM, Adam Barth aba...@webkit.org wrote: Ninja has extremely fast incremental builds and can be generated by GYP. Here are some stats from a year ago: https://plus.google.com/101038813433650812235/posts/irc26fhRtPC Ninja has gotten even faster since then. If you're interested in trying it out, you can play around with incremental builds of the Chromium port on Mac or Linux. You can also look at the build output from the chromium bots. Empty build in 1s: http://build.webkit.org/builders/Chromium%20Linux%20Release/builds/66807/steps/compile-webkit/logs/stdio Build with a few files changed in 15s: http://build.webkit.org/builders/Chromium%20Linux%20Release/builds/66800/steps/compile-webkit/logs/stdio …and this is on fairly slow bots. On my SSD-equipped laptop, I can do incremental rebuilds of all of chrome after touching one (cpp or mm) file in 2-6s. ___ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev ___ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev ___ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
[webkit-dev] Using ninja (was Re:Common build system (was Re: WebKit Wishes))
OK, this sounds fantastic. And I've noticed how much faster Chromium incrementally builds using ninja when I've done that. So, ignoring the discussion of a single build system for a moment, how can I, as a developer using the OS X + WK2 port, living mostly in Xcode for editing and debugging, use ninja? I need the idiot's guide :) (Note: I am an idiot, but not so much an idiot to realise that the answer involves lots of work and probably updating some old GYP files that you and Adam were testing with, etc etc. I'm just selfishly thinking that cutting even 30s off each incremental rebuild would make me so much happier that I'd be willing to put up with other inconveniences.) Dean On 03/02/2013, at 4:54 PM, Eric Seidel e...@webkit.org wrote: +1 Ninja is beyond-words amazing. http://martine.github.com/ninja/ For better or worse, it is not designed to use human-editable build files, but rather to be used by a meta build system, like GYP or CMake. So using ninja is really an orthogonal discussion to the single build system discussion for WebKit. :) Were the WebKit project to convert to using a single meta-build system, ninja would become an option many users might choose. I'm told most Chromium hackers have GYP set to output ninja files these days, with the exception of some folks who still want the MSVC build environment. For WebKit ports already using CMake, they should definitely try ninja today! Anyway, my wish was not about arguing for a specific build solution. I'm instead noting that for the project to continue to move quickly, we need to stop needing to edit 8 build systems for every file move/addition. Whether that's GYP or CMake or something else, I don't really care. Adam and I tried GYP-for-WebKIt a while back. But any of these solutions will require buy-in from Apple, as they will have to do the largest amount of work converting to use something other than XCode. On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 8:20 PM, Nico Weber tha...@chromium.org wrote: On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 4:58 PM, Adam Barth aba...@webkit.org wrote: Ninja has extremely fast incremental builds and can be generated by GYP. Here are some stats from a year ago: https://plus.google.com/101038813433650812235/posts/irc26fhRtPC Ninja has gotten even faster since then. If you're interested in trying it out, you can play around with incremental builds of the Chromium port on Mac or Linux. You can also look at the build output from the chromium bots. Empty build in 1s: http://build.webkit.org/builders/Chromium%20Linux%20Release/builds/66807/steps/compile-webkit/logs/stdio Build with a few files changed in 15s: http://build.webkit.org/builders/Chromium%20Linux%20Release/builds/66800/steps/compile-webkit/logs/stdio …and this is on fairly slow bots. On my SSD-equipped laptop, I can do incremental rebuilds of all of chrome after touching one (cpp or mm) file in 2-6s. ___ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
