Jonathan Perkin <jperkin%joyent.com@localhost> writes: > * On 2016-02-18 at 12:34 GMT, Greg Troxel wrote: > >> Jonathan Perkin <jperkin%joyent.com@localhost> writes: >> >> >> [1] What's keeping this, anyway? >> > >> > I don't know but I'd like to see it happen 12 months ago. The >> > difference in reduced build/system time is astonishing and I've used >> > it for all my builds for a long time now. >> >> Perhaps you could start a new thread with the accumulated evidence that >> enabling cwrappers does no harm, in terms of missing packages in bulk >> builds, and packages that can't be build normally, on various platforms. >> Because I haven't seen a "here is the data; I think we're over the bar", >> I have been under the impression that we hadn't yet arrived at time to >> flip the default. > > This really needs to be done on NetBSD, as the only platform which can > currently build almost all of pkgsrc. I don't have any NetBSD bulk > build infrastructure, so this will need to come from someone else. So we need Someone to run a bulk build on NetBSD with and without. > However, for the bulk builds I perform on SmartOS, OSX and Linux, I'm > not aware of any regressions caused by moving to cwrappers, just > significantly faster builds. That sounds like "no missing packages, compared to building w/o cwrappers". >> Also, it seems one probably has to re-bootstrap. I am unclear on what >> the effect on NetBSD itself is and how that would happen, in terms of >> changing the default and getting existing systems moved over. > > This isn't the case. Just add USE_CWRAPPERS=yes to mk.conf and you're > good to go. That makes it easier. I have two netbsd-7 machines (i386, amd64) that I do rebuilds on (pkg_rr, not bulk) to look for packages that need fixing. After they finish the current round I'll add that. > I did add a '--cwrappers' argument to the bootstrap script to make it > easier to test, perhaps that is causing the confusion. In hindsight I > probably shouldn't have added it. I didn't know about that. It was just not obvious to me whether this was a bootstrap thing or a runtime thing, without looking.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature