Perhaps I should clarify I bit. It seems my subject line conflated the two distinct (but tangentially related) issues (perhaps it should have been two different emails). The subject line I should have used was something like "quieting output / speeding builds"
Yes, I agree that the number of times make is called is a big part of the slowdown, is there any way to reduce this overhead? I suspect reducing this overhead is extremely non-trivial. I still would like a way to quiet down the output. I am getting close to writing a wrapper for cmake that will filter the output, and perhaps simplify the inputs a little (or at least make them closer to what most of my devs are using right now to ease the transition) Kevin On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 1:55 PM, J Decker <d3c...@gmail.com> wrote: > Actually if you run it with make VERBOSE=1 you'll see that make is > invoked a TON of times... each target is a seperate invokation of > make, including using make to validate the cmake files are built... > it's not really the output but the huge amount of times that make is > run. > > On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 8:40 AM, Kevin Fitch <kfitc...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I am transitioning from a make based build system to cmake, overall I am > > quite happy with cmake, but currently there are two snags: > > 1) The main project I am doing this on is quite large, it produces about > 300 > > targets. So, when I type 'make' I get 300 or so lines of "[ 27%] Built > > target blah..." even when there is nothing (or very little) to do. This > is > > quite annoying. I tried messing with CMAKE_RULE_MESSAGES. I just added > > -DCMAKE_RULE_MESSAGES=OFF to the cmake invocation. But that didn't seem > to > > help. > > 2) The follow on to this is that a 'do-nothing' build still takes about 4 > > seconds (or about 1.25 seconds for "make -j". The previous make based > build > > was effectively instantaneous for a 'do-nothing' build. The do-nothing > (or > > do very little) build is the common case so I hate to regress that far. > > Where should I be looking to address these issues? > > I suspect (2) is a result of cmake generating a recursive make system (as > > opposed to the current make based system we have that uses recursive > > includes, instead of recursive make calls). > > Kevin > > _______________________________________________ > > Powered by www.kitware.com > > > > Visit other Kitware open-source projects at > > http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html > > > > Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: > > http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ > > > > Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: > > http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake > > >
_______________________________________________ Powered by www.kitware.com Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
