Hi Chris, Taking a step back to look at the problem and without being antagonistic, the point of source code is for it to be compiled and run. It is illogical and quite frankly incorrect for a .ozf file to be included into the repo. The troublesome thing is that after compiling share/lib/Base.oz and comparing the size of that .ozf file to share/lib the file size is almost double the size. (this might be a good time to do a git bisect)
Another thing is look at the comment for https://github.com/mozart/mozart/commit/e009bbddb95e48f94be0ad1d6d8e3367e57f24d8 Whereas this earlier comment brings more information to light https://github.com/mozart/mozart/commit/934a7bd6e44f0b423042900de57275724e5f2b24 : " Base.ozf is now in the CVS Whenever the base environment has been changed, a new base environment can be created by make new-base The reason to have Base.ozf in the CVS is because it changes not very often and created pickles will be include the same base environment regardless where the system has been built. " Does anyone have deeper knowledge about this? Kind regards Stewart. On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 2:04 PM, Chris Double <[email protected]> wrote: > Why is share/lib/Base.ozf included in the source repository and not > built? I noticed in stack traces that the path to this was being shown > as the path of whoever's system it was actually built on. A 'make > new-base' in 'share/lib' rebuilds it. Should it be rebuilt always to > avoid it getting out of date from the 'Base.oz' file it's built from? > > Chris. > -- > http://www.bluishcoder.co.nz > _________________________________________________________________________________ > mozart-hackers mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.mozart-oz.org/mailman/listinfo/mozart-hackers > _________________________________________________________________________________ mozart-hackers mailing list [email protected] http://www.mozart-oz.org/mailman/listinfo/mozart-hackers
