On 2015-12-04 18:14, Erik Joelsson wrote:
On 2015-12-04 14:42, Erik Joelsson wrote:
On 2015-12-04 12:50, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
144 * // For certain dependencies where a legacy
distribution mechanism is
145 * // already i place, the "javare" server layout is
also supported
"in place". Also, missing period.
150 * // buildnumber (optional), files and checksumfile is
possible for
"build number", "checksum file"
* // aritfacts following the standard layout.
"artifacts"
* // For other files, use checksumpath and paths instead
"checksum path"
62 * input.build_unix_os
63 * input.build_unix_cpu
66 * input.build_unix_platform
What is build_unix_cpu, etc? Sounds fully incomprehensible to me. :)
Clarified
I still think this is not so good. What does build_unix_os contain?
"Windows" or "Cygwin"? Is it used only on Windows? And why "unix"?
Is the whole reason for this to be able to separate 32 and 64 bit
cygwin?
Yes, and it would apply the same if we were to use msys. On a 64bit
windows, you can run either a 32bit or 64bit unix emulation layer. I
thought unix_emulation_layer was a bit long so shortened it to unix.
I agree the name is not good.
In the build system, we have a notion of "os env", which is the same
as "os" in most cases, but isn"cygwin" or "msys" on Windows. Maybe
we should use the same terminology here, if we describe the same thing.
os_env only describes msys or cygwin, not the bitness. I need both to
be able to pick the correct executables.
Ok, I give in, here is a new version using "osenv" instead of "unix".
I could not figure out a better combination of variable names than this.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~erikj/8136782/webrev.top.03/
Thanks. :)
Looks good to me now.
/Magnus
/Erik
