Ok, so, it is easy to make it accept other names, actually, we have flex-sdk and sdk, doing so is more flexible, personally, I don't like to have names repeating themselves in my path, I wouldn't like to have apache/flex/flex-sdk, I rather prefer to have apache/flex/sdk.
I'll change that tomorrow if nobody disagree. -Fred -----Message d'origine----- De : Harbs [mailto:harbs.li...@gmail.com] Envoyé : lundi 2 septembre 2013 21:46 À : dev@flex.apache.org Objet : Re: Building the SDK If I'm not mistaken, building the sdk works, but building tlf directly does not work if the sdk is not named flex-sdk. This is a line from build.xml in TLF: <property name="FLEX_HOME" value="${basedir}/../flex-sdk"/> Of course this could be overridden, but keeping the same directory names can't be a bad idea ;-) On Sep 2, 2013, at 10:17 PM, Frédéric THOMAS wrote: > I cloned flex-sdk to sdk, flex-tlf to tlf and had no problems to build > the sdk. > > The only problem was to build falcon, I had to modify the build.xml to > accept either flex-sdk or sdk and add local.properties to the .gitignore. > I've been able to run ant and ant eclipse, did not try with > falcon.js/jx yet > > If nobody has problems with that, I'll commit it tomorrow. > > -Fred > > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Frédéric THOMAS [mailto:webdoubl...@hotmail.com] Envoyé : lundi 2 > septembre 2013 17:12 À : dev@flex.apache.org Objet : RE: Building the > SDK > > Harbs, > > I'm in the process to install the SDK + TLF + others, before my dir > structure was apache/flex/sdk, apache/flex/tlf and was working pretty > well, it wasn't mandatory to have flex-sdk or flex-tlf, so, if you let > me finish, I'll be able to tell you how it went. > > -Fred > > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Harbs [mailto:harbs.li...@gmail.com] Envoyé : lundi 2 septembre > 2013 > 17:07 À : dev@flex.apache.org Objet : Re: Building the SDK > >> First question: Are you using the develop branch in TLF? And building by >> just running "ant" from the sdk's textLayout folder? I'm not having >> these issues. I don't know what will happen if you run the build.xml >> in the TLF repo. I've never done it. > > Yes. That's right. > > The missing type declaration seems to be a real error. I'm not sure > whether the others are real issues or not. > I have not problems ignoring the warnings, but if they are real, might > as well fix them ;-)
