Re: Disabling C++ tests by default?

2015-10-05 Thread Ehsan Akhgari
On 2015-10-04 10:39 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: On 2015-10-02 2:42 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: It might still mean that we can save time on tryserver if we only build these by default if the user has opted in to running

Re: Disabling C++ tests by default?

2015-10-04 Thread Jonas Sicking
On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > On 2015-10-02 2:42 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: >> >> It might still mean that we can save time on tryserver if we only >> build these by default if the user has opted in to running the >> relevant tests. >> >> I agree

Re: Disabling C++ tests by default?

2015-10-02 Thread Eric Rescorla
ed solution is to build them on > > demand, when tests are executed (unless a build option says to build them > > like today). > > > > I was curious if Gecko developers (the audience I perceive that cares > about > > them the most) would be generally opposed

Re: Disabling C++ tests by default?

2015-10-02 Thread Sylvestre Ledru
Le 02/10/2015 07:10, Gregory Szorc a écrit : > Currently, the Firefox build system builds C++ tests by default. This adds > extra time to builds for something that a significant chunk of developers > don't care about because they don't run them. > > Is disabling building C++ t

Re: Disabling C++ tests by default?

2015-10-02 Thread Randell Jesup
> > automation, of course). A more involved solution is to build them on >> > demand, when tests are executed (unless a build option says to build them >> > like today). >> > >> > I was curious if Gecko developers (the audience I perceive that >> >

Re: Disabling C++ tests by default?

2015-10-02 Thread Jonas Sicking
solution is to build them on >> > demand, when tests are executed (unless a build option says to build them >> > like today). >> > >> > I was curious if Gecko developers (the audience I perceive that cares >> about >> > them the most) would be genera

Re: Disabling C++ tests by default?

2015-10-02 Thread Eric Rescorla
build > them > >> > like today). > >> > > >> > I was curious if Gecko developers (the audience I perceive that > >> > cares about them the most) would be generally opposed to disabling > >> > building C++ tests by default. If not, we

Re: Disabling C++ tests by default?

2015-10-02 Thread Ehsan Akhgari
On 2015-10-02 2:42 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: It might still mean that we can save time on tryserver if we only build these by default if the user has opted in to running the relevant tests. I agree with Gregory. I really don't see much value in building these binaries by default. For the people

Re: Disabling C++ tests by default?

2015-10-02 Thread Gregory Szorc
On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:12 PM, Kyle Huey wrote: > How much time does it save? > On my MBP, removing all CPP_UNIT_TESTS from moz.builds (which also stops the production of a few static libraries): -141s CPU time (6831s total, so 2%) -16s wall time `mach build binaries`

Re: Disabling C++ tests by default?

2015-10-02 Thread Bobby Holley
On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > On 2015-10-02 2:42 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: > >> It might still mean that we can save time on tryserver if we only >> build these by default if the user has opted in to running the >> relevant tests. >> >> I agree

Re: Disabling C++ tests by default?

2015-10-02 Thread Bobby Holley
Cool - thanks for checking Greg! On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 1:57 PM, Gregory Szorc wrote: > On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Bobby Holley > wrote: > >> On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Ehsan Akhgari >> wrote: >> >>> On 2015-10-02

Re: Disabling C++ tests by default?

2015-10-02 Thread Mike Hommey
On Fri, Oct 02, 2015 at 10:01:45AM -0700, Eric Rescorla wrote: > > Because the win is small, it shouldn't be a priority, but requiring > > something like --enable-cpp-tests should be ok to do (and of course > > automation would do that) if/when someone finds time. With the way the build system

Re: Disabling C++ tests by default?

2015-10-02 Thread Gregory Szorc
On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Bobby Holley wrote: > On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Ehsan Akhgari > wrote: > >> On 2015-10-02 2:42 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: >> >>> It might still mean that we can save time on tryserver if we only >>> build these

Re: Disabling C++ tests by default?

2015-10-02 Thread Eric Rescorla
On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 3:31 PM, Mike Hommey wrote: > On Fri, Oct 02, 2015 at 10:01:45AM -0700, Eric Rescorla wrote: > > > Because the win is small, it shouldn't be a priority, but requiring > > > something like --enable-cpp-tests should be ok to do (and of course > > >

Re: Disabling C++ tests by default?

2015-10-02 Thread Ted Mielczarek
On Fri, Oct 2, 2015, at 04:40 PM, Bobby Holley wrote: > On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Ehsan Akhgari > wrote: > > > On 2015-10-02 2:42 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: > > > >> It might still mean that we can save time on tryserver if we only > >> build these by default if the

Disabling C++ tests by default?

2015-10-01 Thread Gregory Szorc
be generally opposed to disabling building C++ tests by default. If not, we can go with an easy solution (and require people who care to add a mozconfig entry). If so, we go with the harder solution. Is disabling building C++ tests by default a reasonable change

Re: Disabling C++ tests by default?

2015-10-01 Thread Kyle Huey
s a build option says to build them > like today). > > I was curious if Gecko developers (the audience I perceive that cares about > them the most) would be generally opposed to disabling building C++ tests > by default. If not, we can go with an easy solution (and require people wh

Re: Disabling C++ tests by default?

2015-10-01 Thread Mike Hommey
today). > > I was curious if Gecko developers (the audience I perceive that cares about > them the most) would be generally opposed to disabling building C++ tests > by default. If not, we can go with an easy solution (and require people who > care to add a mozconfig entry). If so, we go w