harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Geir Magnusson Jr." <g...@pobox.com>
Subject Re: [build] Downloading dependencies
Date Wed, 27 Dec 2006 12:51:29 GMT

On Dec 27, 2006, at 7:22 AM, Ivanov, Alexey A wrote:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:geir@pobox.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 2:12 PM
>> To: dev@harmony.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [build] Downloading dependencies
>>
>>
>> On Dec 27, 2006, at 6:08 AM, Tim Ellison wrote:
>>
>>> Ivanov, Alexey A wrote:
>>>>> -----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.
>>>
>>> I assume that you are keeping the MD5 checksum so that we know we
> have
>>> picked up the right (version/unmodified) file from people's windows
>>> directory for the HDK?
>>
>> Good idea.  I'm actually very skeptical that MSFT has distributed
>> only one unique binary under that name, but heck, lets see.. :)
>
> Do you have many builds of MSFT compiler? :)
> I think it may be changed only with Service Packs to the compiler.

And MSFT never needs to patch anything :)

>
> Having this in mind, I think there's only one version of DLL with same
> name.

Lets test your theory - my version is 7.10.3052.4  (Of course, I'd  
ask why a file with only one version needs that level of precision  
for it's version number, but hey...)

Anyone have anything different?


> Any way it doesn't really matter what actual version the DLL is: when
> you build the classlib or vm yourself, you'll have the correct version
> of the DLL in system32 which shipped with the compiler. And this  
> DLL is
> guaranteed to be compatible with the compiled code -- any other  
> version
> is not.

That's my point - right now, we *don't* have that situation.  We  
build with whatever you have in system32, and we package the thing  
that came from dll's-R-us (or whatever the website is...)

>
> Perfectly VM and classlib should be compiled with the same compiler
> version. It'll be interesting if the HDK works where VM is compiled
> against 7.1 and classlib against 8.0 for example...

Let us know how that goes ;)

geir

>
> Regards,
> Alexey.
>
>>
>> geir
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Tim
>
> --
> Alexey A. Ivanov
> Intel Enterprise Solutions Software Division


Mime
View raw message