Re: [zeromq-dev] [PATCH] MSVC10 project files
On 11/20/2011 06:20 PM, Stuart Webster wrote: > Personally, I > think cmake is a great tool, but professionally I think it would be an > obstacle for some institutions and may preclude them from considering > 0MQ. I have worked as a contractor for several investment banks and it > is not uncommon for them to have locked down network access (i.e. > developers are prevented from downloading installers for unsanctioned > software, such as cmake) and build environments. I haven't worked for a MS shop for almost a decade now so I may be on a wrong track here, however, I would say these guys won't use git either. They will rather download a zip file, unpack it and develop in MSVC. If that's the case, it shouldn't be a problem to use CMake to generate MSVC project files, which will then be packed into the zip archives. Not using git and using generated project files may be an obstacle to contributing back to 0MQ project, but again, the organisations with heavy process (such as those mentioned above) are unlikely to contribute back without an amount of legal paperwork by far outweighing the troubles caused by the build system. Thoughts? Martin ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
Re: [zeromq-dev] [PATCH] MSVC10 project files
Hi, I am not sure what to do about the original patch. Are you guys still discussing it or should it be applied and you are discussing different matters (CMake)? Martin ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
Re: [zeromq-dev] [PATCH] libzmq: broken VPATH builds
On 11/20/2011 08:44 PM, Philip Kovacs wrote: > Patch reattached. Applied to master. Thanks! Martin ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
Re: [zeromq-dev] [PATCH] MSVC10 project files
I've used cmake extensively, as well as autotools. cmake is gaining acceptance although autotools is far more pervasive for *nix environemnts. cmake can indeed emit MS project files for command line builds via NMAKE and/or IDE project builds. The approach I usually take is to emulate the config.h.in -> config.h autotools style of programming so that all source still retains the familiar glue: #ifdef HAVE_CONFIG_H #include #endif Sadly, "build wars" is a bit of a losing battle. cmake can still become unpleasant to maintain if you try to satisfy too many diverse environments. Typically upstream shops will simply bifurcate their distributions and release source tarballs based on autotools (or even just plain vanilla makefiles) for the *nix people, as well as Microsoft-friendly .msi installers for Windows runtime and software developer kits. The .msi runtime and sdk style of delivery is very appealing for many institutions. They are digitally signed and verified and easy to install. Double-click to install and you start coding immediately. Phil > having to maintain multiple sets of Windows build files is the problem > indeed. It seems like for each iteration of Visual Studio we need to > create another set of project files as the conversion doesn't seem to > work as expected (at least import library location is lost during > conversion). > > This is the reason why something like CMake as an abstraction would be > a lot more appealing. As far as I understand it's possible to generate > Visual Studio project files using CMake. If this works well nothing > would prevent us from distributing the project files separately. Does > this sound acceptable? > > I don't think we can drop MSVC9 support in the middle 2.1 cycle as > this would be a major backwards compatibility break. > > -- > Mikko Koppanen signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
Re: [zeromq-dev] [PATCH] libzmq: broken VPATH builds
> Phillip, can you please use your email address in the patch instead of > the website URL? > > If you want a copyright in the modified files, add it there and make it > a part of the patch. Patch reattached. Thanks. Phil From 052ca926dd811e337fbddda0692f7763c3817ec4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Philip Kovacs Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 15:12:08 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] Fix broken VPATH/parallel builds Signed-off-by: Philip Kovacs --- doc/Makefile.am |8 perf/Makefile.am |3 ++- tests/Makefile.am |4 +++- 3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/doc/Makefile.am b/doc/Makefile.am index ff00c18..103652f 100644 --- a/doc/Makefile.am +++ b/doc/Makefile.am @@ -29,11 +29,11 @@ if BUILD_DOC SUFFIXES=.html .txt .xml .3 .7 .txt.html: - asciidoc -d manpage -b xhtml11 -f asciidoc.conf \ - -azmq_version=@PACKAGE_VERSION@ $< + asciidoc -d manpage -b xhtml11 -f $(srcdir)/asciidoc.conf \ + -azmq_version=@PACKAGE_VERSION@ -o$@ $< .txt.xml: - asciidoc -d manpage -b docbook -f asciidoc.conf \ - -azmq_version=@PACKAGE_VERSION@ $< + asciidoc -d manpage -b docbook -f $(srcdir)/asciidoc.conf \ + -azmq_version=@PACKAGE_VERSION@ -o$@ $< .xml.1: xmlto man $< .xml.3: diff --git a/perf/Makefile.am b/perf/Makefile.am index 0f5e78e..4053ba5 100644 --- a/perf/Makefile.am +++ b/perf/Makefile.am @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@ -INCLUDES = -I$(top_builddir)/include +INCLUDES = -I$(top_builddir)/include \ + -I$(top_srcdir)/include noinst_PROGRAMS = local_lat remote_lat local_thr remote_thr inproc_lat inproc_thr diff --git a/tests/Makefile.am b/tests/Makefile.am index bbae270..fb0c6f8 100644 --- a/tests/Makefile.am +++ b/tests/Makefile.am @@ -1,4 +1,6 @@ -INCLUDES = -I$(top_builddir)/include +INCLUDES = -I$(top_builddir)/include \ + -I$(top_srcdir)/include + LDADD = $(top_builddir)/src/libzmq.la noinst_PROGRAMS = test_pair_inproc \ -- 1.7.8.rc1 signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
Re: [zeromq-dev] [PATCH] MSVC10 project files
On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 5:20 PM, Stuart Webster wrote: > That's basically what these patches provide. 32-bit configurations build > free of warnings with /W3. 64-bit configurations generate several legitimate > "conversion from 'size_t' to 'int', possible loss of data" warnings which I > intend to address with a subsequent patch. Note that this patch does not > remove the MSVC9 project files, but I appreciate that maintaining both sets > is not an appealing prospect. I would suggest that they are removed if this > patch or some variant thereof is accepted. Hi, having to maintain multiple sets of Windows build files is the problem indeed. It seems like for each iteration of Visual Studio we need to create another set of project files as the conversion doesn't seem to work as expected (at least import library location is lost during conversion). This is the reason why something like CMake as an abstraction would be a lot more appealing. As far as I understand it's possible to generate Visual Studio project files using CMake. If this works well nothing would prevent us from distributing the project files separately. Does this sound acceptable? I don't think we can drop MSVC9 support in the middle 2.1 cycle as this would be a major backwards compatibility break. -- Mikko Koppanen ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
Re: [zeromq-dev] [PATCH] libzmq: broken VPATH builds
On 11/19/2011 09:19 PM, Mikko Koppanen wrote: > On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 7:12 PM, Philip Kovacs wrote: >> >> Curious as to why my patch was not accepted. The vpath build errors >> are quite real and my patch fixes them. Reattached. Please provide >> some feedback if the fix is unacceptable. > > Hi, > > I took a quick look at the patch and it looks good to me. There are > probably some VPATH breakages in --with-pgm build that need to be > addressed at some point. Ok. Thanks for review. Phillip, can you please use your email address in the patch instead of the website URL? If you want a copyright in the modified files, add it there and make it a part of the patch. Thanks! Martin ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
Re: [zeromq-dev] [PATCH] C++11 move constructor/assignment operator for socket_t and context_t
On 11/19/2011 11:59 PM, Mikko Koppanen wrote: > the pull request looks good. I added a few comments about indentation > in the pull request. I wonder if it would make sense to even add a > test in to the build so that this functionality would automatically > work if supported by the compiler. I'm wondering this preprocessor > definition: __GXX_EXPERIMENTAL_CXX0X__ and whether GCC is going to > change that when C++11 is stable. This is a patch to cppzmq. It happens to be part of 0MQ/2.1.x but it is a separate project from 3.0.0 onwards. This separate project consists of a single file (zmq.hpp) and has no build system, thus, I guess, the patch is OK as is. Martin ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
Re: [zeromq-dev] Lazy Pirate
>> I have a question regarding the Lazy Pirate Pattern. Basically I am trying >> to figure out how I can use something similar in a completely asynchronous >> way, i.e. having a client and worker using Tornado from pyzmq. > > You might check out the Freelance pattern, which is asynchronous and > doesn't use a broker. Right you are! Almost forgot about that one, even though I liked it a lot better, when I initially read the chapter! >> The asynchronous worker seems pretty straight forward, although I've >> experienced problems when one worker crashes. For some reason all other >> workers stopped working as well. This should really be a problem on my side, >> but I am grateful for any ideas :) > > Generally, debug by printing messages as they enter and exit each node. Did exactly that, and nothing look too obvious. Maybe it was something completely unrelated... Thanks for the input! Daniel ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
