-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Gladman
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 5:18 PM
To: mpir-devel@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [mpir-devel] Possible Issue with the Windows command lIne
build?
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Hart
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 5:07 PM
To: mpir-devel@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [mpir-devel] Possible Issue with the Windows command lIne
build?
On 28 September 2012 16:36, Brian Gladman <b...@gladman.plus.com> wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: Bill Hart
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 4:16 PM
To: mpir-devel@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [mpir-devel] Possible Issue with the Windows command lIne
build?
I don't know very much about the command line build. But I am not
really in favour of option 1.
I don't see why option 3 is a problem. However, it depends. Is the cfg
file different per architecture? Would it automatically find the right
one if they were all there in their respective directories?
====================
The problem is just the overhead of producing them and keeping them up to
date.
They are generated automatically by the Visual Studio build generator so
someone has to build every possible architecture variation to set up all
of
them.
The Visual Studio build in MPIR is now very different to that supplied
earlier. Apart from a small number of pre-configured builds, a user now
has
to run a Python program and select the architecture for which they wish to
build. This then produces a number of files needed for building with
Visual
Studio, after which MPIR for the selected architecture can be built using
the Visual Studio IDE. The necessary cfg.h files are built as a part of
this process.
I see.
I can do this and add them if we want to adopt this solution but it means
in
effect that I end up partly supporting the command line build, a task that
I
am not really keen to take on. However, I can do it as a 'one off'
provided I am not then committed to provide on-going support for it.
You'll have to give me a list of all the .cfg files, as I will have to
add them to the distribution mechanism, otherwise they won't be in the
release tarball.
It is possible to construct a script which generates them all in one go?
===========================
Yes, that's a good idea. I think I can probably do this by stripping out
stuff from my normal build generator (it will be a Python script though).
===========================
Its such a good idea that I have already done it!
In the big gap in MPIR development progress, I had completely forgotten
about solving this problem over a year ago.
So all that has to happen is that anyone building the command line build has
to run mpir_config.py only once and all the cfg.h files are generated.
So we can either (a) add all these files to distributions, (b) document the
need to run mpir_config.py once before any Windows command line build, or
(c) run a slightly modified mpir_config.py from the command line build
script.
Brian
already generate all the cfg.h files
If we do this, all directories (and subdirectories) in mpn/x86w and
mpn/x86_64w will end up with a cfg.h file in them. Listing these
directories is I hope easier than me compiling a list :-)
Brian
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"mpir-devel" group.
To post to this group, send email to mpir-devel@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
mpir-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/mpir-devel?hl=en.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"mpir-devel" group.
To post to this group, send email to mpir-devel@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
mpir-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/mpir-devel?hl=en.
