ant-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From hiren patel <hiren...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: which build tool yields fastest incremental builds? GNU make , Jam , Ant or Scons ?
Date Wed, 27 Jul 2005 18:21:53 GMT
- smart copies, e.g. only copy things that need copying

yes. our build system does smart copies.
- smart testing, e.g. only test things that have changed)
 
NO. Testing done is not a part of the build process.

- compiling only things that have changed

yes.

- dependency management

a script generates the dependencies for the marent make.
build has almost 16 stages . build operation is governed by a perl script and it does some
of the stages in parallel.
 
Actually, motivation for moving  from merant make to other options becasue GNU make, ANT,scons
 and JAM are free tools. 
 
well at this point ANT and Scons seem good alteranatives of merant make. 
Since most of the developes are working on their own small subsytem and
building it, incremental build time should not increase way high after moving to ANT or scons.
 
I dont know wheather ANT provides Visual studio support or not.
has anybody used ANT on such a large project? or lets say is it feasible to use ANT ?
 
 
Thanks,
Hiren patel
 
 
 

James Fuller <jim.fuller@ruminate.co.uk> wrote:

>so anybody knows which one is fastest among Jam,Ant and Scons ? 
> 
>

the differences in perf are small between the three versus other
bottlenecks, for example does your current build system do the following;

- smart copies, e.g. only copy things that need copying

- smart testing, e.g. only test things that have changed)

- compiling only things that have changed

- dependency management

- do you have distributed builds or one very large smart build, with a
project of this size build time perception is critical, if a
developer(s) can build, test, doc, deploy their specific module without
having to build the whole thing?

- i would look at optimising pvcs as well as looking at things like hi
perf hard drives etc...

then I would change the question to which of these build technologies is
it easier to implement the above?

personally I would choose make or Ant as I have worked in these for ever
and for this size project (as its near the biggest something can be!)
and would have to bring all my tricks to bear (like doing a full trace
on build operation and optimising Ant source code specifically for this
project!).

feel free to email me off list.

cheers, Jim Fuller




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@ant.apache.org


		
---------------------------------
 Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page 
Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, 8-Bit, 0 bytes)
View raw message