On possibility is to one source tree, one build tree, then use filesets at
the jar creation.
for example.
<jar jarfile="c1.jar">
<fileset dir="build">
<include name="org/ungoverned/c1/**"/>
</fileset>
</jar>
On Sun, 18 Feb 2001, Richard S. Hall wrote:
> First, I am using Ant 1.3beta2 on Win98 with JDK 1.3.
>
> I was re-organizing my build files this morning and I ran across two
> issues. I have all of my source files in one package tree, since that
> is how they are logically organized, but portions of the source tree are
> actually packaged into separate JAR files.
>
> For an example, we'll use this directory structure:
>
> src
> org
> ungoverned
> c1
> c2
> c3
>
> The packages c1, c2, c3 represent individual components that are
> compiled into separate JAR files containing only the classes from their
> respective package.
>
> Since each one (c1, c2, c3) is created using a very similar target in my
> build file, I use local parameters to parameterize the differences,
> e.g.:
>
> <target name="c1" depends="blah">
> <property name="my.name" value="c1"/>
> <property name="my.output" value="${out$}/${my.name}"/>
> ... then compile and create JAR file here...
> </target>
>
> For each component, the above is exactly the same other than the name of
> the component. (One side note, is there a built-in property for the
> currently executing target?). An issue arose when I added a dependency
> between two of the components, e.g.:
>
> <target name="c1" depends="blah,c2">
> ...
> </target>
>
> In this scenario, Ant does execute the "c2" target first, but when it
> comes back to execute the "c1" target, the local property ${my.name} is
> bound to the value in "c2", not the value that I set it to in "c1".
> Thus the target doesn't do the right thing since its name property is
> incorrect. Is this the correct behavior?
>
> In order to work around this issue, I have removed the dependency from
> "c1" and I added a sub-target that builds them in the correct order. In
> doing so, I did discover another issue. If I specifically build just
> the "c1" target and the "c2" target has not been created, then Ant
> (actually javac I assume) automatically includes the Java files from the
> "c2" target that "c1" depends on because all of the classes are in the
> same src tree. The interesting thing is that Ant correctly states that
> is is compiling 14 files (which I counted), but the result from the
> compiler includes classes from the "c2" package. This doesn't seem like
> the correct behavior from Ant's perspective (from javac perhaps, but not
> Ant). I would rather get an error saying there were unresolved symbols,
> instead I end up with duplicated classes in multiple JAR files.
>
> Both of these issues are avoidable, but annoying. Am I doing something
> incorrectly here?
>
> -> richard
>
