harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Hindess <mark.hind...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: [general][M2] Code frozen
Date Mon, 25 Jun 2007 08:50:53 GMT

On 25 June 2007 at 13:59, "Stepan Mishura" <stepan.mishura@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 6/24/07, Mikhail Loenko <mloenko@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > We have passed our code freeze date for M2
> >
> Mikhail,
> Just to be clear - M1 milestone published snapshots include build for
> Windows x86, Linux (libstdc++ v5 and libstdc++ v6) x86 and Windows
> x86_64.

Do you think it would be possible to produce source snapshots?  The
Apache release FAQ (at http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html ) says:

  The Apache Software Foundation produces open source software. All
  releases are in the form of the source materials needed to make
  changes to the software being released. In some cases, binary/bytecode
  packages are also produced as a convenience to users that might
  not have the appropriate tools to build a compiled version of the
  source. In all such cases, the binary/bytecode package must have
  the same version number as the source release and may only add
  binary/bytecode files that are the result of compiling that version of
  the source code release.

Currently binaries are our primary artifact.  I appreciated that it may
be a little late to try to correct this for this release, but I think it
is important that we try to correct this before we get too comfortable
with the current release process.

It should now be possible to do:

  ant bundle_src
  mkdir /tmp/build
  tar -C /tmp/build -xzf target/apache-harmony-src-r550411-snapshot.tar.gz
  cd /tmp/build/harmony-src-550411
  ant -Dauto.fetch=true

which would seem to me to be more in-keeping with the Apache release

On this subject, I'd like to permission to commit a patch to correct the
top-level directory name in the source tar.gz/zip files from:




The format of the archive names changed over time and these have become


> I assume that we still aimed to x86 architecture and I need to build
> milestone candidates for:
> - Windows x86
> - Linux x86. BWT, again for both libstdc++ versions?
> And what about x86_64?
> As I said M1 includes Windows x86_64. Should we publish them to let
> the community test them to see how good they are?
> Thanks,
> Stepan.

View raw message