Re: [Libreoffice] [PATCH] ant/dmake to gbuild conversions
Hi Peter, Michael, all, On Fri, 23 Sep 2011 11:12:38 +0100 Michael Meeks wrote: > Clearly there is then no prohibition on using ant, or > external / java packages that require it - but Peter's patches seem > to convert two of the five modules using ant to (cleaner) gnu make > files in the process and leave only: beanshell scripting and xmerge > requiring ant. > > Seems like progress to me, I'd love to see that included. I would have to agree. The patches look pretty clean(*) and look way better than the original codegenerated ant build.xmls. I also agree that we should stick with ant for _external_ projects that use it as their buildsystem (and not plug in our own build system like had been done with dmake at a few places), but for the modules in question now gbuildifying them seems to be a good thing. So: no objections -- actually quite fine work there, Peter! Best, Bjoern (*) But as with all things build system you need tinderboxes to be sure. -- https://launchpad.net/~bjoern-michaelsen ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] [PATCH] ant/dmake to gbuild conversions
On Fri, 23 Sep 2011, Michael Meeks wrote: > > On Fri, 2011-09-23 at 04:28 -0500, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: > > Well, Peter asked the question on the list before starting to work on > > it and and the consensus was that for these limited cases the benefit > > outweighed the cost. > > Indeed - the outcome of the: > > 'use of apache ant in libreoffice' > > thread from Wed, seemed (to me) to be that there is an advantage to > being able to properly parallelize and gnumake-ify the java compiles, > and if there are (increasingly) few java pieces and we can drop ant in > some star-trek future as a build dep, that is surely no bad thing. > > Clearly there is then no prohibition on using ant, or external / java > packages that require it - but Peter's patches seem to convert two of > the five modules using ant to (cleaner) gnu make files in the process > and leave only: beanshell scripting and xmerge requiring ant. > > Seems like progress to me, I'd love to see that included. I'm going to work on converting the other ant modules soon. I'll commit these 2 patches after I finish testing them a bit more. Peter ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] [PATCH] ant/dmake to gbuild conversions
On Fri, 2011-09-23 at 04:28 -0500, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: > Well, Peter asked the question on the list before starting to work on > it and and the consensus was that for these limited cases the benefit > outweighed the cost. Indeed - the outcome of the: 'use of apache ant in libreoffice' thread from Wed, seemed (to me) to be that there is an advantage to being able to properly parallelize and gnumake-ify the java compiles, and if there are (increasingly) few java pieces and we can drop ant in some star-trek future as a build dep, that is surely no bad thing. Clearly there is then no prohibition on using ant, or external / java packages that require it - but Peter's patches seem to convert two of the five modules using ant to (cleaner) gnu make files in the process and leave only: beanshell scripting and xmerge requiring ant. Seems like progress to me, I'd love to see that included. ATB, Michael. -- michael.me...@suse.com <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] [PATCH] ant/dmake to gbuild conversions
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Rene Engelhard wrote: > On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 04:38:35PM -0400, Peter Foley wrote: >> I've attached two ant/dmake to gbuild conversions. Review would be >> appreciated. > > Well, as people already said, ant is the standard tool for Java "make". > I'd disagree to change this. Well, Peter asked the question on the list before starting to work on it and and the consensus was that for these limited cases the benefit outweighed the cost. > In this case, you also (by a quick skimming > over the patch, maybe I oversaw it, but..) lost important parts of > makefile.mk - like the Class-Path: fixing. I'm really not versed in Java related thing.. but there is a gb_Jar_set_jarclasspath() function. doesn't that already do the necessary 'fixing' ? Norbert ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] [PATCH] ant/dmake to gbuild conversions
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 04:38:35PM -0400, Peter Foley wrote: > I've attached two ant/dmake to gbuild conversions. Review would be > appreciated. Well, as people already said, ant is the standard tool for Java "make". I'd disagree to change this. In this case, you also (by a quick skimming over the patch, maybe I oversaw it, but..) lost important parts of makefile.mk - like the Class-Path: fixing. Grüße/Regards, René -- .''`. René Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer : :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/ `. `' r...@debian.org | GnuPG-Key ID: D03E3E70 `- Fingerprint: E12D EA46 7506 70CF A960 801D 0AA0 4571 D03E 3E70 ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice