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