Issue 61940 - Enable the alternative use of spawn instead of fork/exec for dmake
Summary: Enable the alternative use of spawn instead of fork/exec for dmake
Status: CLOSED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Build Tools
Classification: Code
Component: dmake (show other issues)
Version: current
Hardware: All All
: P3 Trivial (vote)
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: hjs
QA Contact: issues@tools
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2006-02-12 00:23 UTC by quetschke
Modified: 2013-08-07 15:34 UTC (History)
7 users (show)

See Also:
Issue Type: PATCH
Latest Confirmation in: ---
Developer Difficulty: ---

Attachments
Patch for dmake (5.49 KB, patch)
2006-02-12 00:24 UTC, quetschke 		no flags Details | Diff
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this issue.
Description quetschke 2006-02-12 00:23:32 UTC 
Especially for cygwin it is said that fork/exec is rather slow, but the use
of {posix_,}spawn might be also a win for other systems.

The following patch adds a new configure option: --enable-spawn (disabled by
default) and the correspondend code to dmake to use spawn.

The patch seems to be a small win for W32-tcsh, my build time went down from
8h41m to 8h15m, a ~5% speed win.

I verified that the patch also works for dmake on linux using the dmake
testsuite.
Comment 1 quetschke 2006-02-12 00:24:36 UTC 
Created attachment 34077 [details]
Patch for dmake
Comment 2 quetschke 2006-02-12 00:50:32 UTC 
Patch committed to dmake43p01, but issue not added due to issue 61940.
Comment 3 quetschke 2006-02-12 00:54:00 UTC 
Sorry, I meant issue not added due to issue 61941.
Comment 4 quetschke 2006-02-15 05:28:03 UTC 
Issue added to CWS dmake43p01.
Comment 5 stx123 2006-02-15 09:47:07 UTC 
CWS dmake43p01 seems to be growing and growing. Do you have plans for QA and
integration?
Comment 6 quetschke 2006-02-15 16:06:27 UTC 
Hi Stefan,

------- Additional comments from st Wed Feb 15 01:47:07 -0800 2006 -------
CWS dmake43p01 seems to be growing and growing. Do you have plans for QA and
integration?

yes, was done and integration was planned (from me) to be last year in summer.

But with the constrains from RE and the target of OOo 3.0 for the CWS its
impossible to integrate it right now. That's the reason why I don't even bother
to change the state from "ready for QA" for that CWS. I just continue fixing
bugs when I find them.

Actually I think there is no reason to block this CWS. The reason was that some
functional changes would be introduced by the bugfixing. I didn't know then
that this already happened when dmake 4.3 got integrated in
cws_src680_ooo20040704. Since then dmake understands:

#i17992# Allows the nesting of expressions and a much more complex syntax
for dmake. It is now possible to nest expressions with () and any
combination of || and &&.

But Hamburg's dmake 4.1 doesn't know them.

Debian uses dmake from CWS dmake43p01 for it's builds and I certainly also use
it for W32-tcsh and W32-4nt builds.

There are a few essential patches to fix parallel building it this CWS, without
them the build might fail in strange ways.

IMHO we should integrate it soon and not wait for later, it cannot hurt Hamburg
builds as it's not used there.

If there is a consensus to integrate it soon I'll set the CWS to new, finish the
remaining issues and then we can do another "build"-QA.
Comment 7 quetschke 2006-03-15 13:25:04 UTC 
The patch was already committed a while ago to dmake43p01.

Reassigning for verification.
Comment 8 quetschke 2006-03-15 13:25:53 UTC 
@ause: Please verify!
Comment 9 hjs 2006-04-19 18:12:45 UTC 
.
Comment 10 hjs 2006-04-21 17:27:16 UTC 
.