On 22.05.2013 16:25, janI wrote:
On 22 May 2013 16:00, Andre Fischer <awf....@gmail.com> wrote:
On 22.05.2013 00:04, Kay Schenk wrote:
We are seeing a fair number of folks who want to work on a specific aspect
or module of AOO. This is not unexpected, of course.
This is the information for how to do partial builds from the new Build
Guide:
[1]
http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Documentation/Building_**
Guide_AOO#Partial_Builds<http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO#Partial_Builds>
This is the information from the old Tools information:
[2a]
http://www.openoffice.org/**tools/build_env_tools.html<http://www.openoffice.org/tools/build_env_tools.html>
[2b]
http://www.openoffice.org/**tools/tools/build.html<http://www.openoffice.org/tools/tools/build.html>
I actually used the "build --all:<prjname>" for what I was doing...
So my questions.
I don't know if new developers should necessarily know if a change is
compatible or not.
Would just ONE set of instructions in the Building Guide work for both
cases?
Well, yes. You can always do a clean build. But that is probably not
what you mean. But: the motivation to do a compatible build is to have
turn around times as small as possible. This can only be achieved by
a) improving our build system or
b) by taking shortcuts
Option b) requires you to provide additional knowledge. That is usually
of the form: I changed file X.cxx in <module> but I know/believe/are fairly
certain that only library Y.dll has to be rebuild and nothing else.
Afterwards you have to copy Y.dll (or Y.so or Y.dylib ...) into your
office installation.
In other words, you have to know what you are doing. Otherwise use the
standard mechanism and be patient :-)
I agree that this should be better documented. Both the technical steps
(building one directory/library, copying this library into an installed
office) and the rules of thumb when to build just one library or a whole
module or everything.
...and
Would the dmake instructions work for both dmake and make? (Something I
think is probably another point of confusion for new developers.)
To some degree we already have that. For example call 'build debug=t' in
the top-level directory of a dmake or gbuild module and the module is built
with debug information.
-Andre
I might be lazy, but when even if I only change a single file, I run build
--all, please remember in many cases (not all modules).
Yes, that is the safe way. And if you make an incompatible change it
still may not be enough. If you really want to be on the safe side then
you should do a 'build --prepare --from <module>' first.
I have ubuntu running in virtualbox with win7 as host (ugly I know it), and
build -all take 4minutes 12 seconds...and then I am sure everything is
correct.
1) There are cases of incompatible changes where 'build --all' would not
be enough
2) When you change a file that eg requires sw to be rebuild then even on
Linux it will probably take longer.
3) On Windows takes a lot longer. And if you do a lot of debugging then
the Window platform with its Developer Studio becomes a lot more attractive.
4) 4 minutes is still a long time to wait when you do it often enough.
-Andre
rgds
jan I.
...and
Could we use a syntax that is more like what is found in [2b] for all
cases?
------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
