Dear committer,
There was an interest on the list to have an incremental federated
build rather than the build from scratch. Let me remind you that the
patch [1] solves this problem with an exception to class library
natives, so it has a reason to be committed. Another reason is that it
proved to be useful for me: I have just applied this patch to the
fourth workspace instead of waiting for the whole recompilation.
Thank you in advance.
[1] http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-5521
On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 2:00 PM, Alexei Fedotov
<alexei.fedotov@gmail.com> wrote:
> Alexey
> You are correct about incremental build issue of the federated build.
>
> The fix of the issue is not very difficult: see HARMONY-5521 for the
> patch. BTW, the build file with Nathan's unified hyphens looks much
> more readable. Thanks, Nathan!
>
> [1] http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-5521
>
>
>
>
> On Feb 17, 2008 1:24 PM, Alexey Petrenko <alexey.a.petrenko@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Current federated build is not suited for every day work. Because it
> > makes only clean builds and this takes lots of time.
> >
> > So we should keep possibility to build class library, vm and selected
> > class library module alone.
> >
> > SY, Alexey
> >
> > 2008/2/17, Alexei Fedotov <alexei.fedotov@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > Nathan, all,
> > > Copying class library artifacts to the working_vm/ directory is a
> > > legacy of two component system, isn't it? Now, when we have several
> > > (three, and will have more) upper level components, it looks
> > > reasonable to collect the build artifacts at the same upper level. Why
> > > should not we assemble the build in the target/ dir? May be one should
> > > add several target directories for different build configurations. I
> > > believe that the artifact location should not affect class library
> > > development, we just need to move deploy directories to a common
> > > place.
> > >
> > > What do you think?
> > >
> > > On Feb 16, 2008 11:58 PM, Nathan Beyer <ndbeyer@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > I was thinking that we could use a utility target in the top-level
> > > > build script that copied the HDK artifacts from the working_vm to the
> > > > working_classlib, but I'm still catching up with the new DRLVM build.
> > > > Would copying the 'working_vm/deploy' to the 'working_classlib/deploy'
> > > > be sufficient?
> > > >
> > > > The use for this would be to facilitate class library development, so
> > > > I want to be able to run the top-level build, copy the HDK artifacts,
> > > > then move into 'working_classlib' and be able to do cleans, rebuilds
> > > > and tests.
> > > >
> > > > -Nathan
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > With best regards,
> > > Alexei
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> With best regards,
> Alexei
>
--
With best regards,
Alexei
|