On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
> In addition to your comments, I also find the gyp syntax somewhat unpleasant.
> In particular, in .gypi lists of files to compile, ever entry is
> double-quoted, comma-separated, line-separated, and then grouped in multiple
> levels
In addition to your comments, I also find the gyp syntax somewhat unpleasant.
In particular, in .gypi lists of files to compile, ever entry is double-quoted,
comma-separated, line-separated, and then grouped in multiple levels of braces.
This is noisier than any of our current formats except th
Hi Brent,
I definitely agree that gyp is rather undocumented and kind of hard to
use. It's nowhere near the level of documentation of CMake, let alone
Xcode or GNU makefiles. Hopefully we can fix this in the near future.
That said, I'd be kind of surprised if cmake was already installed on
your s
Hi Dimitri,
On Mar 24, 2011, at 9:24 AM, Dimitri Glazkov wrote:
> \With the gyp conversion at this stage, we now have a possible solution
> to this problem. Given that there aren't any other viable alternatives
> in the present, please consider the most productive way of
> contributing: filing
First, let me warm the tone of this thread a bit with an earnest
salute to Adam for trying to solve the problem by actually doing
_something_, rather than talking about it, as we've done for years
now. My own contributions to the matter are small and insignificant in
comparison.
To recall, we do h
On Mar 24, 2011, at 12:28 AM, Adam Barth wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 8:46 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>> On Mar 23, 2011, at 3:33 AM, Adam Barth wrote:
>>> From my perspective, approach (2) is more desirable than checking in
>>> generated project files because approach (2) encapsulates
>>>
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 8:46 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> On Mar 23, 2011, at 3:33 AM, Adam Barth wrote:
>> From my perspective, approach (2) is more desirable than checking in
>> generated project files because approach (2) encapsulates
>> Apple-internal build process to Apple folks, more speci
On Mar 23, 2011, at 3:33 AM, Adam Barth wrote:
While this is certainly technically feasible, it would add a huge amount
of overhead to the process of performing a submission.
>>>
>>> How often do you submit WebKit to the Apple internal build system? If
>>> that's sensitive informatio
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 1:33 PM, David Levin wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 12:17 PM, Adam Barth wrote:
>>
>> $ time git svn rebase
>> [... update my working copy from changes during lunch (four revisions)
>> ...]
>> real 1m10.316s
>> user 0m8.194s
>> sys 0m16.400s
>>
>> $ time ./
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 2:13 PM, Peter Kasting wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 2:08 PM, Adam Barth wrote:
>> Indeed. I suspect (2) and (3) are worth doing regardless.
>
> AFAIK, gyp currently always regenerates everything and then compares the new
> versions to the old to see if it actually nee
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 2:08 PM, Adam Barth wrote:
> Indeed. I suspect (2) and (3) are worth doing regardless.
>
AFAIK, gyp currently always regenerates everything and then compares the new
versions to the old to see if it actually needs to touch the files on disk.
This seems safe but slow.
P
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Mark Rowe wrote:
> On 2011-03-23, at 13:49, Adam Barth wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 1:33 PM, David Levin wrote:
>>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 12:17 PM, Adam Barth wrote:
$ time git svn rebase
[... update my working copy from changes during lunch (fou
On 2011-03-23, at 13:49, Adam Barth wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 1:33 PM, David Levin wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 12:17 PM, Adam Barth wrote:
>>> $ time git svn rebase
>>> [... update my working copy from changes during lunch (four revisions)
>>> ...]
>>> real1m10.316s
>>> user
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 1:33 PM, David Levin wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 12:17 PM, Adam Barth wrote:
>> $ time git svn rebase
>> [... update my working copy from changes during lunch (four revisions)
>> ...]
>> real 1m10.316s
>> user 0m8.194s
>> sys 0m16.400s
>>
>> $ time ./Tools/S
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 12:17 PM, Adam Barth wrote:
>
> $ time git svn rebase
> [... update my working copy from changes during lunch (four revisions) ...]
> real1m10.316s
> user0m8.194s
> sys 0m16.400s
>
> $ time ./Tools/Scripts/generate-project-files
> real0m4.339s
> user0m3.
On 2011-03-23, at 12:29, Adam Barth wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 12:26 PM, Mark Rowe wrote:
>> On 2011-03-23, at 12:17, Adam Barth wrote:
>>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Mark Rowe wrote:
On 2011-03-23, at 03:33, Adam Barth wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 12:22 AM, Mark Rowe
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 12:26 PM, Mark Rowe wrote:
> On 2011-03-23, at 12:17, Adam Barth wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Mark Rowe wrote:
>>> On 2011-03-23, at 03:33, Adam Barth wrote:
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 12:22 AM, Mark Rowe wrote:
> On 2011-03-22, at 23:50, Adam Barth w
On 2011-03-23, at 12:17, Adam Barth wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Mark Rowe wrote:
>> On 2011-03-23, at 03:33, Adam Barth wrote:
>>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 12:22 AM, Mark Rowe wrote:
On 2011-03-22, at 23:50, Adam Barth wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 8:14 PM, Mark Rowe
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Mark Rowe wrote:
> On 2011-03-23, at 03:33, Adam Barth wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 12:22 AM, Mark Rowe wrote:
>>> On 2011-03-22, at 23:50, Adam Barth wrote:
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 8:14 PM, Mark Rowe wrote:
> Product names for targets are redundan
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 3:33 AM, Adam Barth wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 12:22 AM, Mark Rowe wrote:
> >> In any case, I'm glad we've found a technically feasible solution.
> >
> > We've had at least one technically feasible solution from day zip: check
> in the generated project files.
>
> F
On 2011-03-23, at 03:33, Adam Barth wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 12:22 AM, Mark Rowe wrote:
>> On 2011-03-22, at 23:50, Adam Barth wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 8:14 PM, Mark Rowe wrote:
>
Product names for targets are redundantly declared in the Xcode project
when they're
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 12:22 AM, Mark Rowe wrote:
> On 2011-03-22, at 23:50, Adam Barth wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 8:14 PM, Mark Rowe wrote:
>>> On 2011-03-22, at 19:16, Adam Barth wrote:
WebKit-folk,
With a bunch of help from Dimitri and Eric, we now have a functioning
>>>
On 2011-03-22, at 23:50, Adam Barth wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 8:14 PM, Mark Rowe wrote:
>> On 2011-03-22, at 19:16, Adam Barth wrote:
>>> WebKit-folk,
>>>
>>> With a bunch of help from Dimitri and Eric, we now have a functioning
>>> GYP-based build for the Apple Mac port. There are stil
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 11:50 PM, Adam Barth wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 8:14 PM, Mark Rowe wrote:
>> The default configuration is Debug rather than Production.
>
> Thanks. I thought I had fixed that, but I'll investigate this issue
> some more. I understand that this is a hard requirement
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 8:14 PM, Mark Rowe wrote:
> On 2011-03-22, at 19:16, Adam Barth wrote:
>> WebKit-folk,
>>
>> With a bunch of help from Dimitri and Eric, we now have a functioning
>> GYP-based build for the Apple Mac port. There are still a couple bugs
>> we need to fix before this build s
On 2011-03-22, at 21:28, Eric Seidel wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 8:14 PM, Mark Rowe wrote:
>>
>> On 2011-03-22, at 19:16, Adam Barth wrote:
>>
>>> WebKit-folk,
>>>
>>> With a bunch of help from Dimitri and Eric, we now have a functioning
>>> GYP-based build for the Apple Mac port. There
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 8:14 PM, Mark Rowe wrote:
>
> On 2011-03-22, at 19:16, Adam Barth wrote:
>
>> WebKit-folk,
>>
>> With a bunch of help from Dimitri and Eric, we now have a functioning
>> GYP-based build for the Apple Mac port. There are still a couple bugs
>> we need to fix before this bui
On 2011-03-22, at 19:16, Adam Barth wrote:
> WebKit-folk,
>
> With a bunch of help from Dimitri and Eric, we now have a functioning
> GYP-based build for the Apple Mac port. There are still a couple bugs
> we need to fix before this build system is ready for production
> (they're filed as block
WebKit-folk,
With a bunch of help from Dimitri and Eric, we now have a functioning
GYP-based build for the Apple Mac port. There are still a couple bugs
we need to fix before this build system is ready for production
(they're filed as blocking Bug 55018, if you're curious). If you'd
like to try
29 matches
Mail list logo
