Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote:
> Which leads us to the packaging bits: prototype_com, prototype_sparc,
> prototype_i386: these could really be generated. It's really easy to
> make mistakes when writing these manually.
It's also really easy for build problems to cause files not to be built,
and then autogenerated package maps would simply be missing files. The
autogeneration of packaging info has always seemed to me to be one of the
worst misfeatures of the JDS build system, and I'm sure you remember even
more bugs than I do of files simply disappearing or reappearing in builds
because of it.
I much prefer having the static package maps checked into the tree, so that
if a file is not built, the package build fails and it's noticed and fixed
immediately. Sure - have tools to build those, but require human intervention
to change the contents of the package so that anyone who builds it can be
sure they've gotten the exact same set of files as the official builds,
including the future official builds.
(The whole "install packages being built on the running system" is the other
big thing that scares me in the JDS builds - it ranks up there with the old
"run builds as root" that ON does and which I never understood either, but I
suppose I was spoiled by the X & CDE builds which have always cleanly built
to a proto area and packaged without ever having to run as root or install
anything on the build machine. It's nice to have a build machine we can
all share, all build on at the same time, and not have to give out root on
or worry about someone accidentally doing something that will break others.)
--
-Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersmith at sun.com
Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering
