[Bf-committers] New Developer Meeting minutes

jmsoler at free.fr jmsoler at free.fr
Thu Jan 7 11:17:41 CET 2010

Sorry to say that but on win32 systems meanwhile Cmake fails just to begin to
compile anything with free MSVC versions, scons works correctly.


Selon Campbell Barton <ideasman42 at gmail.com>:

> The build system topic took most of the meeting or so and I hope we
> dont let this happen again or the new dev meetings will get very
> uninteresting.
> Please next time try to avoid arguing about stupid topics like this
> while we are trying to give basic info to new devs.
> I think topics like this just need better WIKI Docs and not discussion
> with new devs. (Or limit to 5min intro)
> ----
> Hi Nathan, I didnt mean to say scons does full rebuilds, just that its
> slower if you do quick rebuilds.
> SCons is great to get a build running however for development Im now
> quite convinced its not the way to go.
> When nothing needs building, CMake's Makefiles take around 2.1 seconds
> on my system. Scons takes between 30 and 40 seconds.
> Time to compile and link with one change with CMake made is 6.8 second or so.
> I have tried optimizing scons before and I can get moderate
> speedups... but it still doesnt get close to CMake's.
> SCons with BF_QUICK gives more acceptable times but this means I waste
> time thinking about what libs to build and occasionally getting it
> wrong and having to find out why BF_QUICK failed.
> I appreciate your work on scons and dont mean to belittle it but with
> CMake so much faster for rebuilds I feel justified in recommending
> CMake over scons for people who intend to build often.
> - Campbell
> On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 8:46 AM, Nathan Letwory <jesterking at letwory.net>
> wrote:
> > Roger Wickes wrote:
> >>
> >> We held our second monthly new developer
> >> on Sunday, attracting x new developers to the Blender family.
> >> Minutes are here:
> >> We discussed Build systems, Patch Submission, and Python, with a focus on
> Cmake versus Scons.
> >
> > Hi, great to see that the second new dev meeting has been held - too bad
> > I couldn't be there, since SCons has been talked about, too.
> >
> > I feel I have to make a small comment though:
> >
> > SCons never does a full recompile, when it is not necessary (and it
> > hardly ever is). So in that sense, SCons will also do incremental
> > builds. Sure, it does read in the SConscripts, but *that is not
> > equivalent to a complete rebuild*. It does pose some slight overhead
> > when starting a build, but that should not be the reason to start
> > favoring CMake over SCons. Again: SCons builds only what is needed.
> >
> > When doing a clean rebuild, (remove *everything* created by SCons/CMake
> > before doing your build), I assure you that you won't find useful
> > differences in build times.
> >
> > I have started writing out docs on the SCons system on my blog
> > http://www.letworyinteractive.com/b/building-blender-with-scons/ (see
> > also the top navigation for more links). More info there will gradually
> > be published as I get it all written out. It already contains good info
> > on how the configuration of the system goes.
> >
> > /Nathan
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bf-committers mailing list
> > Bf-committers at blender.org
> > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
> >
> --
> - Campbell
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

More information about the Bf-committers mailing list