Re: [dev] [ANN] samurai: ninja-compatible build tool

From: Anselm R Garbe <garbeam_AT_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 23:12:21 +0200

On 26 July 2017 at 18:32, Michael Forney <mforney_AT_mforney.org> wrote:
> On 7/26/17, Anselm R Garbe <garbeam_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
>> Out of curiosity, what is the point of a build system like ninja, if
>> the codebase requires to be complex?
>
[..]
> In oasis I'm using ninja like you're use stali.mk in stali. The
> advantage is that dependencies are tracked throughout all packages
> (not only within a package and between packages), so I can edit a file
> in some library (libcurl for instance), and git, mupdf, and netsurf
> all get rebuilt automatically. The disadvantage of course is it's not
> a standard UNIX tool.

Many thanks for sharing this clarification and comparison.

>> Isn't the issue to be tackled the
>> codebase complexity then?
>
> Yes ideally projects like llvm and chromium would instead focus on
> codebase complexity. But the argument that ninja is bad because bad
> projects use it does not make sense to me.

I didn't suggest that implication. It seems that ninja offers some
advantages for a price, that I cannot estimate yet.

Best regards,
Anselm
Received on Wed Jul 26 2017 - 23:12:21 CEST