Mailing-List: contact dev-help@harmony.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@harmony.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of gcjhd-harmony-dev@m.gmane.org
 designates 80.91.229.2 as permitted sender)
To: dev@harmony.apache.org
From: Gregory Shimansky <gshimansky@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [build] Downloading dependencies
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2006 00:37:46 +0300
Lines: 137
Message-ID: <emcafa$p12$1@sea.gmane.org>
References: <8E389A5F2FEABA4CB1DEC35A25CB39CE88D8DB@mssmsx411>
 <emblf7$3qd$1@sea.gmane.org> <45895A18.3030802@pobox.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (Windows/20060909)
In-Reply-To: <45895A18.3030802@pobox.com>
Sender: news <news@sea.gmane.org>

Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> Can we actually build w/ VS.NET 2005?

No we can't. Too much has changed since VS.NET 2003, and even building 
classlib is a pain, I didn't even try drlvm. But I think we'll have to 
support VS.NET 2005 eventually.

> if so, then search for both...

No I just mentioned that if we some day support VS.NET we'll have to 
check for both msvcr71.dll and msvcr80.dll.

> 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.
>>
>>> 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!
>>
>>
> 


-- 
Gregory