Gregory Shimansky wrote: > On Thursday 06 July 2006 03:46 Geir Magnusson Jr wrote: >> In HARMONY-681, I applied the patch to build DRLVM as debug by default, >> but 'rejected' the classlib patch, as it's not overridable as the DRLVM >> one is. >> >> I think that we'd like to be able to set a flag for release build, >> rather than have to rummage about in each makefile and include. >> >> Yea? Nea? > > +1 for release flag when it is needed > > I support this as I also think that current classlib build system is rather > primitive
Don't mistake being simple with being primitive <g>. It will need to grow as we expand the amount of platform-dependent code, but I suggest we try to keep things as simple as possible. > which is easy to alter by developers locally but isn't really meant > to be a product build system. What do you mean? > But the default I am sure should be debug everywhere, VM, classlib, tools > until Harmony leaves the incubation state. I don't think it is tied to project incubation, but I agree that we need a switch that allows debug/release compilation. And if it is debug by default that is fine too. > This is what my patch did (if I > didn't miss some places in classlib makefiles). > > Add release switch later when it is needed. Now... is it important to have > it? > Is it necessary to build classlib even with -mpentium3? I don't think so. That's a different topic -- we should decide which architectures are 'officially' supported. Regards, Tim -- Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) IBM Java technology centre, UK. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
