Mailing-List: contact harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (asf.osuosl.org: 64.74.244.71 is neither permitted nor
 denied by domain of geir@pobox.com)
Message-ID: <449286C8.3030705@pobox.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 06:24:08 -0400
From: Geir Magnusson Jr <geir@pobox.com>
Reply-To: geir@pobox.com
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (Windows/20060516)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [drlvm] apr question (linux)
References: <44921709.3060504@pobox.com>
 <2c1cfe8b0606160157m338bb892nd08efb682a9b38af@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <2c1cfe8b0606160157m338bb892nd08efb682a9b38af@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


Nataly Naumova wrote:
> On 6/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <geir@pobox.com> wrote:
>> Why exactly is APR slightly massaged and then specially built?
>>
>> Why can't we just do the regular ./configure -> make sequence to build
>> it?
> 
> Hi Geir,
> 
> here's the reason of not building *extra* things by their own build.
> Initially there was a concept not to use own build for every *extra*
> things, such as APR or  CLASSLIB in order to support different
> compilers and configurations. For APR it was not trivial to build it
> in different modes (debug/release, different compilers etc.), that was
> required for building DRLVM. For CLASSLIB it was done primary for the
> same reasons and it was really easy to specify a compiler and a mode
> to build.
> So we have written our own builds for such *extra* things (as a part
> of drlvm build). But in the APR case it was impossible to produce the
> same building as APR did on linux. So the compromise decision was done
> to invoke the APR configure, and then to build using drlvm build. Such
> decision may be considerred as a hack, but it really simplifies the
> building for different configurations (debug/release), different
> compilers, etc.
> But you can try to build APR using its own build (make-based), but
> please be sure that it will be able to build in debug/release
> configurations and it will be very good if it will be possible to
> build by different compilers (msvc/icl/gcc/icc), not only by default
> compilers.

Thanks.  That's a perfectly reasonable explanation :) with the
unpleasant side effect of putting a lot of work on my shoulders :)

I'm all for supporting both issues.  I would guess that debug/release is
easy (or should be)  but the compiler thing may be another story.  I
don't know.

What I'd like to do is reduce the amount of maintenance that we have to
do, so that as the depdencies evolve and change, we don't have to worry
as much.  It's also easier when we have some issue to not start off a
problem with "when using our custom build of your project...."

I also think that we can engage w/ the APR community (for example) to
offer tweaks that we need that don't hurt anyone else...

geir


---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org