many new apps don't use make for their builds. They use jam instead. It's quite sad that portage doesn't have any convenient way to control the build process (like it has for make). Me personally, I miss something like JAMOPTS="-j9" (should be in make.conf) since jam is capable od parallel build, too. "ejam" macro (as opposed to "emake") for ebuild makers would be cool too...
ccache (enabled only through portage) doesn't seem to work, too. Didn't have oportunity to try distcc.
although i agree we should add an JAMOPTS and an ejam script, i dont agree
with the 'many new apps dont use makefiles' ...
i really havent seen anything to support that claim and jam is by far in
the minorty in terms of building packages
Yeah, I agree, too. But that "many" in my former sentence was the same as
in "Many users use linux". I know that the number of linux users is nothing
compared to the rest but I'm sure you can still fell the meaning of this
Can you provide a list of packages in the portagetree that use jam? If it's just 10 or 20 packages I'm against it, when we get at 100 or 200 we might consider it.
The number would be two-digit :-( but being against it just because of that? No way! The low number of packages which use jam can make this request go to the end of the portage to-do list but rejecting it at all? That's a nonsense...
The reason why I'm against it is that there are many more environment vars that
can affect the build process (just think of all the fortran or ada packages), if we add all these variables make.conf will get bloated. You can still add it by yourself and it will be used (like any other variable).
For the ejam script, that's IMO something for an eclass, not portage itself.
Spanky, what do you think about adding an ejam script to eutils ?
if we do add ejam it should go to the same place emake is
I have no idea what jam is. Never heard of it.
Anything you put in make.conf will end up in the
environment for ebuilds. Add it if you want.
Using it is the ebuild maintainers perrogative.
Do we actually have need of this as 'ejam' are
there common options that get passed in?
I'm not that deep into jam. I've been forced to use it when I was working on some projects so I've just learnt to set the env. vars. and stuff. The whole build system seemed to be much simpler than the "make hell" so I was wishing (I still do) to have some kind of support in Gentoo.
Anyway, I'm working for someone else and I almost don't use jam now. You can close this bug with LATER or something like that but I hope there will be someone to make Gentoo "jam ready" so developers can migrate away from make comfortably (ccache and distcc support)...
Maybe we'll do this if jam becomes more popular, no need for it now.
Apparently it's not that popular.