Received: from mail.cmpwn.com (mail.cmpwn.com [45.56.77.53])
	by nld3-dev1.alpinelinux.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F2369782B78
	for <~alpine/devel@lists.alpinelinux.org>; Wed, 11 Dec 2019 14:42:07 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=cmpwn.com; s=cmpwn;
	t=1576075325; bh=ccY7tj/8HX0cTQLkByFsUu+fvc5lkphoh+8sAx93MIQ=;
	h=In-Reply-To:Date:Subject:From:To:Cc;
	b=Q904b+vktp+gm2x4MsC7wBaIoyFvVbHd3pfX4X4o2niiPBubsPbP9fXDwm61wIUdp
	 NBTdC9ow72R9BGcgTM37oJc2C9YTOxZXLm42Dg+cJsFdwDOES1HsY18ZOoqg0awQyI
	 bLsrRMSULlY6mzwkMTOIpboy72a74Tg+md8Q0IJo=
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
In-Reply-To: <20191211094116.4908c616@ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2019 09:42:04 -0500
Subject: Re: Proposal: replace ninja with samurai
From: "Drew DeVault" <sir@cmpwn.com>
To: "Natanael Copa" <ncopa@alpinelinux.org>
Cc: <~alpine/devel@lists.alpinelinux.org>
Message-Id: <BZ2O2OMRVNZG.38Y8EDZCUSIQH@homura>

On Wed Dec 11, 2019 at 9:41 AM, Natanael Copa wrote:
> What I think is nice with ninja compared to make, is that we don't need
> set -j to make it use all cores. Will samurai not use all detected
> cores without setting -j?

Yes, it uses all cores even without -j being set.

> Do you have any example with hostility or non-cooperative against
> Alpine?
>
> I am against this change if it is purely for political reasons.

It's not purely for political reasons, though they are a factor. I
explained that samurai is a much smaller and simpler implementation, an
order of magnitude smaller and written in C rather than C++.

The non-cooperation with requests from distros and users to add a means
of controlling the jobs via the environment is here:

https://github.com/ninja-build/ninja/issues/1482

> Does chromium build with samurai? Does chromium developers support
> builds with samurai?

I've asked around to see if anyone has built Chromium with samurai. I
expect it works fine.

Does Chromium support builds with musl? Busybox?

> I'd like to have them both available so we can easily pick one
> depending on which works or is supported.

As discussed on IRC, the chances of hitting a bug where samurai doesn't
work and ninja does is extremely slim, and has never been seen in
practice.

> I also saw that there was a comparison with pkg-config vs pkgconf on
> IRC. The main motivator for pkgconf switch was that pkg-config
> introduced a circular dependency (pkg-config -> glib -> pkg-config).
> The pkgconf author is also an Alpine developer so any issues we had
> with pkgconf were fixed very quick upstream.
>=20
> Do we have similar problems with ninja?
>
> Can we expect the same level of support from samurai that we have with
> pkgconf?

There are no circular dependency issues with ninja that I'm aware of.

We can probably expect a good level of support with samurai, Michael
has always been responsive and is an active Alpine Linux user.