How long does Mozilla take to make?

[ioslipstream]

Wow, Mozilla has been on the make for the last hour already. Compiling the kernel doesn't take this long. How long did it take to make for some of you all out there?

I'm on an Athlon 1000Mhz if the cpu speed has anything to do with it, but according to gkrellm it only seems to be using about 20% of my cpu during the make.

This is the first "large" program I've installed so far. I've only been installing little things like gnapster up to this point, and those took mere seconds.

Guess I wasn't prepared for this... lol.

[ioslipstream]

Ok, 1h 21m

[PLBlaze]

On my PIII@600 it's about ~90 minutes for the full gmake -f client.mk build_all on slackware and the same on win2000 although it's seems as win2000 builds are a bit faster...

[scott_R]

Why are you guys trying to make it? Download the tar, and run it. You don't need to configure or make it.

[PLBlaze]

<speaks for himself>

There are few reasons why i prefer to compile mozilla myself over tarballs from mozilla.org

First,their builds come with debug info enabled,i can choose to disable debugging information,it's speeds build time too.

Second, i can enable optimizations when running configure which should speed the browser a bit...and optimize it to my architecture.

Third,when someone gets mozilla tarball,the package contains components such as mail,news...and i can specify no to build them if i don't intend to use them.

Fourth,i learn something by getting to know how to use cvs...and talk with cool people on irc.mozilla.org

That's what i choose to get mozilla working despite the long build times and in the end it brings satisfaction :D too.But then again that's me and my way of using open source...

<goes to compile mozilla again>

[scott_R]

You make a good point, but you are missing a critical piece, IMHO. Part of debugging a program is to debug it for the average user. I also have no use for many of the misc. parts of mozilla, but if most people receive their builds via tarballs, it seems to me the best way to do debugging is to load the tarballs and work from there, compiling the source against the tars to compare the two.

Regardless, I just posted the way I did so that people didn't get the impression that using mozilla required an intense amount of time. For most people, dropping the tarball is all that it takes. As far as speed enhancements, the recent builds are so quick that I see few advantages in removing the DB code (even if you're not testing), and compared to other mozilla based browsers, the recent builds are fast and stable enough that the average user won't need to worry.

Just my 2 cents. :)