On 5/28/13 9:26 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On Tue, 28 May 2013 18:19:57 -0700
Brad Roberts <[email protected]> wrote:
Ignore what may or may not exist outside the current make files.
Just start with what exists in them. Soon after there are workable
targets to the existing makefiles, I'll get the auto-tester to
execute them and upload the results to s3 and make them public.
I really don't think the zip/tarball creation steps should be a
separate script. A while back I started putting together a proof of
concept / strawman version of what I was thinking. They're likely
somewhat bitrotten, but look at my account on github in the dmd,
druntime, and phobos repos. There's an 'install' branch for each of
them with a commit or two to each.
I stopped when I git the documentation as the build systems for them
are absurdly complex and convoluted. Additionally, the tools stuff
needs work, though its been ages since I last looked at them.
While that may be a feasible approach, IMO I think it's worth
minimizing the amount of work D's infrastructure needs to do in
shell, batch and makefile scripting. Compared to D itself, those tend
to be less portable (most notably the Win/Posix rift), more difficult to
write/maintain, and less graceful with unexpected failures. Plus
there's the increased dogfooding and the whole "self-hosted bragging
rights" thing that some people value.
Except that the build infrastructure already exists and incrementing on
top of it is a reasonably small task. Ripping out what we have and
changing it fundamentally isn't. That there's a single make file for
all but windows is a pretty good demonstration that it _is_ fairly
portable. The primary (if not only) reason we don't use a single make
file is that the make executable we have on windows came from the dmc
world and is awful. Replacing it with gnu make would help a ton.
I'll give a much more practical response now: As a new make target,
getting it added to the auto-tester would be a small quick job. Getting
it written, reviewed, and pulled would be much easier than a month of
discussion around what the replacement should look like, etc. I'd
prefer to have automated builds _nowish_ not laterish.
In fact, I suspect that what I whipped up and pointed to above would get
us nightly builds w/in a day or two and finishing up the docs and tools
could be done later.
In further fact, that's what I'm going to do tonight.. at least get a
pull request generated to start the bike-shedding.
_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta
