Switch Linux and macOS CI runners to use Ninja build

[mewim]

No description provided.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (314781c) 89.61% compared to head (ed40a0f) 89.48%.
Report is 4 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2264      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   89.61%   89.48%   -0.14%     
==========================================
  Files        1016     1021       +5     
  Lines       35806    36003     +197     
==========================================
+ Hits        32089    32218     +129     
- Misses       3717     3785      +68     

see 56 files with indirect coverage changes

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[Riolku]

We should probably use gmake in at least one of the jobs. I don't think it particularly matters which, but we should test that gmake still works.

[Riolku]

Benefit of doing it in GCC is build with ASAN and benchmark runs sooner. Benefit of doing it in clang means any clang tidy errors are shown earlier.

[mewim]

I did not switch the benchmark to use ninja so gmake is being tested in benchmark. Is it sufficient or do you prefer to use gmake in a test?

[Riolku]

I think I'd rather have the benchmark use ninja and clang use gmake, because that should give us the fastest overall CI speeds.

[mewim]

OK I will redeploy the benchmark runners some time and update this...
The benchmark uses a different Dockerfile and runs on a different machine.

[mewim]

@Riolku I have updated and redeployed the benchmark runners to use Ninja build and switched clang build job back to using gmake. I also removed several unneeded dependencies from the benchmark runner.

[Riolku]

If you use an env var, remove the parameter to make on the later line.