[pacman-dev] Fwd: [PATCH] RFC: support incremental build with VCS sources.

[Allan McRae]

On 01/10/13 13:55, Connor Behan wrote:
> On 30/09/13 08:30 PM, Allan McRae wrote:
>> On 29/09/13 03:01, Lukas Jirkovsky wrote:
>>> Accidentally sent this to a wrong address... I hope forwarding this
>>> won't break the patch.
>>>
>>> ---
>>> Hi,
>>> This patch adds incremental build support for the packages with VCS sources.
>>> It is not complete work (only GIT is supported), but a mere request for
>>> comments. If there is a chance that something like this will be accepted,
>>> I will extend the support to other VCS, too.
>>>
>>> Rationale:
>>> When someone uses a VCS package, there is a high chance that such user wants
>>> to follow the development more closely. This means that the user will be
>>> rebuilding the package often. However, rebuilding the whole package takes a lot
>>> of time. This can be somewhat mitigated by using ccache. However, the greatest
>>> speedup can be achieved by incremental build. The problem is that current VCS
>>> support makes this pretty much imposible by removing the cloned sources
>>> before building.
>>>
>>> This patch adds a new option --incremental. Using this option forces makepkg
>>> to only update the cloned source directory instead of removing it and cloning
>>> anew. This allows make to use the incremental build feature.
>>>
>>> See also FS#35050
>>>
>>> I've been using this patch for a few days with kdevplatform-git and
>>> kdevelop-git (not the ones from AUR) at it works great. It already saved me a
>>> lot of time, while using nice and clean PKGBUILD (so far I have been using the
>>> old-style VCS packages that clone sources in their build() function to achive
>>> similar functionality).
>>>
>>> Any comments are welcome.
>>>
>>> Lukas
>>>
>> I have not looked at the patch yet, but my initial impression is that
>> the additional flag should not be needed.   For non-vcs files, we
>> extract the source over the top of whatever is in $srcdir.  We should do
>> the same for VCS sources.
>>
>> Why may be worth having a flag for is to delete the source directory
>> before starting:
>> https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/17175
>>
>> Other opinions here?
>>
>> Allan
>>
> I would get a lot of use out of an --incremental option. Let's say you
> build xorg-server-git, it takes 20 minutes and you install it with
> pacman. The next day, an upstream commit changes 5 lines in one file and
> you decide to stay on top of things and have your installed
> xorg-server-git update to reflect this. Only one file needs to be
> rebuilt but makepkg will still make you wait 20 minutes. I've resorted
> to make installing untracked files more than once because of this.
> 

Did you read my comment beyond the first sentence?