Ok
I still think that it would be better to try to modularize it, however
it is fair enough the deal with the problem using the least amount
of effort!.
Cheers,
Peter
Jean Lazarou wrote:
We changed the memory size, using the ways you described, but the build still
failed.
The problem with splitting in functional units is that the development is done
on several sites with several teams, and the final build made by us... we don't
want to change that strange process because that development is the legacy code
maintainance, new developments are structured differently and we don't run into
the same problems. But, we want to have all the builds made using ant.
Jean
Peter Reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It may be better to give more memory to the compiler.
With enough memory a hugh number of files can be
compiled. The default memory is only I think 64M.
This can be done in a number of ways -
- use the env variable ANT_OPTS to specify the memory
for Ant's jvm
example: export ANT_OPTS="-Xms200m -Xmx1000m"
in your .bashrc file
- spawn a jvm for the compiler
destdir="${build}"
fork="true" memoryInitialSize="100m"
memoryMaximumSize="1000m"/>
In extreme cases you can split the code into functional units
and compile each separately. This would not be at the level of
directories, but complete package trees. We had to do this
in a project once.
Peter
Jean Lazarou wrote:
We are trying to create an ant build for legacy code, that is build using some
make tool, as I don't want to break the already complicated buiild, I preferred
simulate the same behaviour as the make tool we're using. As that legacy code
is still alive I cannot count the files and decide how to split because it
could break in several months.
Jean
Phil Weighill Smith
wrote:
Why not simply put two calls to javac in your build script and split the
source tree in two in the same way that you have in your new task,
passing one tree to the first call and the other to the second?
Clearly you need to ensure that the first call compiles "pre-requisite"
code for the second call and that you should avoid cyclic references
between the two sets of classes.
Phil :n.
PS: I would consider re-structuring the application into "subsystems"
with separate source trees and separate build scripts per subsystem.
Dependencies between subsystems only on the class files (not the source
files). This is the approach we have taken to great effect.
On Tue, 2005-07-12 at 00:12 -0700, Jean Lazarou wrote:
We had problem with a (legacy) build from scratch, seems that, because we have too many java files to compile, nothing is compiled (both on Linux and Windows2000).
After spending 4 days on that, I decided to split the compilation, I created a new task,
name "bydir-javac". The task is derived from Javac.
Can I publish this? Is it a better way of doing it?
Jean Lazarou
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
