harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Ivanov, Alexey A" <alexey.a.iva...@intel.com>
Subject RE: [build] Downloading dependencies
Date Mon, 25 Dec 2006 08:26:00 GMT
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:geir@pobox.com]
>Sent: Saturday, December 23, 2006 3:25 PM
>To: dev@harmony.apache.org
>Subject: Re: [build] Downloading dependencies
>
>
>On Dec 21, 2006, at 4:24 AM, Alexey Petrenko wrote:
>
>> Yes, we do not really need it while Harmony development. I've said
>> this few times.
>> But we definitely need this dll while building distribution package.
>>
>> So copying it while build will not break anything in development but
>> will make life easier for distribution build.
>
>So to keep things clean... why not change things so that the build
>brings in the dll that is being used by the build?  IOW, completely
>remove it as an external dependency, and simply copy it when making
>the build.  That way we are sure that the dll that is included is the
>right one.

This will be the best solution.

Regards,
Alexey.

>
>geir
>
>>
>> SY, Alexey
>>
>> 2006/12/21, Ivanov, Alexey A <alexey.a.ivanov@intel.com>:
>>> >-----Original Message-----
>>> >From: Alexey Petrenko [mailto:alexey.a.petrenko@gmail.com]
>>> >Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 8:49 PM
>>> >To: dev@harmony.apache.org
>>> >Subject: Re: [build] Downloading dependencies
>>> >
>>> >2006/12/20, Stefano Mazzocchi <stefano@apache.org>:
>>> >> Gregory Shimansky wrote:
>>> >> > Ivanov, Alexey A wrote:
>>> >> >> In default installation WinXP does not have this library in
>>> system32.
>>> >> >> This library is installed by Visual Studio 2003 and may be
>>> installed
>>> >by
>>> >> >> other software which was compiled with Visual Studio 2003
>>> (which
>>> is
>>> >> >> v7.1). Visual Studio 2002 (v7.0) has msvc70.dll, if I remember
>>> >> >> correctly.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Also if the person has VS.NET 2005 installed, the DLL name is
>>> >msvcr80.dll.
>>> >> ah, that might be why! I had 2005 installed
>>> >:)
>>>
>>> I believe this DLL is not needed during build, no matter what
>>> compiler
>>> do you use. The compiler itself will find the correct DLL (it should
>>> install it into system32).
>>>
>>> We will need the correct DLL to be able to run natives. I mean we
>>> should
>>> have the DLL in snapshots which are targeted at end-users who may
not
>>> have any version of Visual Studio or Compiler installed. And we
>>> should
>>> provide the correct version of the DLL which corresponds to the
>>> version
>>> of the compiler that was used to build the snapshots.
>>>
>>> I even think that this DLL is not needed in deploy directory either:
>>> when we start VM, the system will link with the DLL from system32
>>> which
>>> is there if one compiled the natives oneself.
>>>
>>> Am I wrong?
>>>
>>>
>>> Alexey, why do we need the DLL while building?
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Alexey.
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>> >SY, Alexey
>>> >
>>> >> >> That is it may happen system lacks for this DLL. And Microsoft
>>> >> >> recommends avoiding copying DLLs to system32 when installing
an
>>> >> >> application. Thus we better distribute this DLL in snapshots
>>> and
>>> >further
>>> >> >> releases because users may not have it.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> On the other hand, if a person has Microsoft compiler
>>> installed,
>>> the
>>> >DLL
>>> >> >> will most likely be in system32.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> That's it.
>>> >> >> --
>>> >> >> Alexey A. Ivanov
>>> >> >> Intel Enterprise Solutions Software Division
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>> -----Original Message-----
>>> >> >>> From: Alexey Petrenko [mailto:alexey.a.petrenko@gmail.com]
>>> >> >>> Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 8:49 AM
>>> >> >>> To: dev@harmony.apache.org
>>> >> >>> Subject: Re: [build] Downloading dependencies
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> If this library exists in system32 then we do not need
to
>>> download it
>>> >> >>> or do any additional search. Linker will do it for us.
>>> >> >>> So we can simple remove all mentions of this library from
>>> >dependencies.
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> But when I suggested this last time someone reported that
>>> he has
>>> MSVC
>>> >> >>> but does not have this library... This looks really strange.
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> We can remove this dependency and look... :)
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> SY, Alexey
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> 2006/12/20, Leo Li <liyilei1979@gmail.com>:
>>> >> >>>>  Yes, actually we can just get MSVC71.dll from the
system32
>>> >directory
>>> >> >> at
>>> >> >>>> least from XP, but as for other windows versions I
am not
>>> sure
>>> the
>>> >> >> exact
>>> >> >>>> version of MSVC DLL. So is it ok if we do not explicitly
>>> get it
>>> but
>>> >> >> use
>>> >> >>> it
>>> >> >>>> while linking by the search path of the os system just
like
>>> other
>>> >> >>>> kernel32.dll?
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> On 12/20/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geir@pobox.com>
wrote:
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>>> >> >>>>>> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>>> >> >>>>>>> Do we really need to download this dll?
 Everyone who
>>> has the
>>> >> >> MSVC
>>> >> >>>>>>> installed should have it, right?
>>> >> >>>>>> I don't care if it's downloaded, linked or
magically
>>> generated
>>> >> >> out of
>>> >> >>>>>> looking into tea leaves, the problem is that
the build
>>> needs
>>> >> >> manual
>>> >> >>>>>> intervention and this is not documented anywhere.
>>> >> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>> We need to make sure that what we say you need
to do is
>>> *only*
>>> >> >> what
>>> >> >>> you
>>> >> >>>>>> need to do. Every other (undocumented step)
is annoying
and
>>> slows
>>> >> >> our
>>> >> >>>>>> community development down.
>>> >> >>>>> Yeah, I get it.  My point is that I'm still not
convinced
we
>>> need
>>> >> >> this
>>> >> >>>>> to be downloaded...
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> So do we?
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> geir
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>> geir
>>> >> >>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>> Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>>> >> >>>>>>>> Tim Ellison wrote:
>>> >> >>>>>>>>> Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Mark Hindess wrote:
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> I tried doing fetch-depends
before rebuild but it
>>> would
>>> fail
>>> >> >> or
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> corrupt
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> dependencies often enough
that it caused more trouble
>>> than
>>> >> >> it
>>> >> >>>>> solved.
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> I can try it again I suppose
- IIRC it was ibiblio
>>> that
>>> was
>>> >> >> the
>>> >> >>>>> main
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> problem and that might
have been a temporary issue.
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> People, you do realize that
if fetch-depends breaks
>>> that
>>> >> >> often we
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> have a
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> bigger problem than just dealing
with faulty updates?
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Imagine that every time fetch-depends
doesn't work
>>> we lose
>>> >> >> the
>>> >> >>>>> ability
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> for some guy out there to contribute
something to us.
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> This is, from a community building
perspective, a
*way*
>>> >> >> bigger
>>> >> >>>>> problem
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> than if the JVM ran at all
after it compiled!!
>>> >> >>>>>>>>> I remember the discussion over
the msvcr71.dll
download.
>>> Have
>>> >> >>> there
>>> >> >>>>> been
>>> >> >>>>>>>>> other problems?
>>> >> >>>>>>>> it's still not fixed!
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> Stefano.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Alexey A. Ivanov
>>> Intel Enterprise Solutions Software Division
>>>

--
Alexey A. Ivanov
Intel Enterprise Solutions Software Division

Mime
View raw message