harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alexey Varlamov <alexey.v.varla...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [build] Proposed changes
Date Thu, 11 Mar 2010 17:48:19 GMT
> I've been reluctant to remove the duplication because quite a lot of
> people are working with just classlib checked out - typically using
> the IBM VME - and having multiple trees to work this way is a little
> awkward.  However, with these changes, I'd like to move towards a point
> where you check out the federated build even when working with the IBM
> VME.  Then we can get rid of the duplication.
> Currently we have:
>  federated/ [*]
>    working_classlib/ [*]
>                     modules/luni [*]
>                     modules/...
>    working_vm/ [*]
>    working_jdktools/ [?]
>                     modules/samsa [?]
> and support people building by checking out just the subdirectories
> marked [*] (and maybe others such as those marked [?]) possibly using an
> hdk.
> I think supporting all of these adds to the complexity of the build
> system and also to the complexity for new developers.  I propose we
> move towards a position of supporting working only at either the
> federated level or at the module level (in which case you define hy.hdk
> and deploy in to that tree).
Yep, your bright idea to have drlvm and ibmvm alongside at the top
level will work out really well here, I believe. A kind of mind-shift
for classlib deleloper fellows ;)

> Another thing that I think adds to the complexity and confusion of the
> build system is the fact that we build and then copy in separate steps
> rather than building in place.  I'd really like the "build-classlib"
> target to build straight in to target/hdk and not require the additional
> "assemble-stuff" target to be executed.  (As I mentioned even more
> confusingly you have to do "build-vm" before "assemble-stuff" but I'm
> going to fix that soon.)
Somehow the concept of HDK was not employed to full extent, probably
this was the key missing unit. After this step further improvements
should follow quite naturally.

> Much of this has been discussed before but with no real progress.  Now,
> I really want to make a concerted effort (with small steps) improve the
> build system.
Moving the whole thing at once is hard, it is bulky. The roadmap you
suggested here seems quite efficient.
Thanks for addressing this chronic matter!


> Comments welcome.
> Regards,
>  Mark.

View raw message