From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Woodcroft Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add dlib. Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 18:51:59 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20160816234507.GA24224@jasmine> <87h9ajzc1z.fsf@ike.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> <20160818202353.GB2393@jasmine> <8737m1yqru.fsf@ike.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> <20160821201757.GA21038@jasmine> <6004b842-2434-9cdc-7a31-04231eac5941@uq.edu.au> <87k2f957wt.fsf@ike.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> <8760qr5o8n.fsf@ike.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> <87eg5e4g4r.fsf@ike.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> <20160824172608.GA24668@jasmine> <878tvm2ddh.fsf@ike.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35335) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bch1x-0004lL-7F for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Aug 2016 18:52:22 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bch1r-0001Xg-Dd for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Aug 2016 18:52:20 -0400 Received: from mail-qk0-x244.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400d:c09::244]:36549) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bch1r-0001XU-9r for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Aug 2016 18:52:15 -0400 Received: by mail-qk0-x244.google.com with SMTP id v123so2362090qkh.3 for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2016 15:52:14 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <878tvm2ddh.fsf@ike.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Marius Bakke , Leo Famulari Cc: guix-devel , Alex Kost On 24 August 2016 3:08:58 PM GMT-04:00, Marius Bakke wrote: > >>> Adding "#:parallel-build? #f" had no effect on tests, indeed the >check >>> phase does not seem to use the previously built dlib; it builds it >again >>> without parallel-build. I will try reproducing the >non-reproducibility >>> on some higher end hardware, hopefully this week. >> >> It's weird that it rebuilds the application again for the tests. >Which >> build is actually installed in the case of success? Is it worth an >> upstream bug report? > >We rely on cmake-build-system for everything but the check phase, which >doesn't have a "proper" check target. I'm no cmake expert, but we can >probably prevent re-build by not including the main application in >test/CmakeLists.txt and instead copy/link in our already-built version: > >https://github.com/davisking/dlib/blob/master/dlib/test/CMakeLists.txt#L15 The cmake build system has an #:out-of-tree? option, maybe set that to #f? Ben