[Interest] Doing a leanest-possible QtWebEngine build
Thiago Macieira
thiago.macieira at intel.com
Sat Dec 31 18:17:55 CET 2016
Em sábado, 31 de dezembro de 2016, às 17:55:00 BRST, René J. V. Bertin
escreveu:
> That's all nice and well for optimisation and/or debug flags, but
>
> - it'd be pretty damn annoying if you can't build a component because the
> official optimisation and/or debug flags lead to memory exhaustion or
> something similarly catastrophic.
Which is not the case. The build doesn't add -g by default, you did. Well, at
least qtwebkit was that, I've never build qtwebengine to confirm (don't even
have it checked out).
> - it'd be equally annoying if you couldn't build a component because locally
> required additional compiler options (which don't change the effect of the
> official options) cannot be provided.
If it's required, it's in the mkspec.
> Of course you cannot support every possible combination of compiler and
> compiler options, but making it hard to set arbitrary options doesn't mean
> people won't try, for instance by using a compiler wrapper that does lots
> of naughty things behind the scenes.
Understood and I agree, but that's not how qmake works.
> It'd also be very nice if WEBENGINE_CONFIG+=reduce_binary_size had the
> intended effect. In the meantime I'm using a proper kludge where I run
> strip on every *. {a,o,so,dylib} file after the build step is done. If
> memory serves me well that decreases the build directory on my Mac from a
> measly 21Gb to a well under a nanoscopic 1Gb (which could be taken down to
> about 150Mb with HFS compression if there were any point in keep the
> directory around for incremental rebuilds).
Again, something added -g.
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
More information about the Interest
mailing list