So would the sources of the binary modules still be available in the tree?
Because I personally like to compile everything to be set dynamically
instead of using static libraries.

On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 10:43 AM, Alex Ionescu <[email protected]> wrote:

> There are all things that KJK and myself have been striving to work
> on. They require changes to rbuild's underpinnings, which have yet to
> happen. There is a Wiki tracking some of this.
>
> The end plan is for us to ship an RDK which would ship with
>
> 1) Public SDK (libs and headers)
> 2) RosBE
> 3) Rbuild itself
>
> And those binary modules would be used unless the source module was
> imported into the tree (say you wanted to have your own rbuild or make
> changes to it).
>
> This would add major stability and testing consistency so everyone
> builds with the same headers, libraries, build scripts and
> rbuild/compiler version.
>
> The extended plan is to add things like mesa and other 3rd party
> libraries as binary-only packages in the RDK as well -- again allowing
> for the option of these to be compiled by hand if the user wants to,
> but normally the static versions would be linked, saving compilation
> time and disk space.
>
> Best regards,
> Alex Ionescu
>
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 11:14 AM, Timo Kreuzer <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > One thing related to this is the sepeartion of the SDK part.
> >
> > Curently the SDK is integral part of the whole source tree. One minor
> > change can cause massive rebuilds even if not needed. The import
> > libraries are even part of the modules that export the functions which
> > is stupid, because the interfaces are expected to be stable.
> >
> > Separating the SDK completely from the sources is not possible atm, but
> > I suggest separating it from the main folder.
> > It could be done similar to how rosapps and rostets are managed. As a
> > sepeate checkout. But instead of putting it into the hardcoded modules
> > subfolder, I would suggest a configurable path. So that multiple reactos
> > checkouts could use one SDK checkout. Each of the main checkouts
> > contains a config file with the sdk path. A default path could be set by
> > RosBE or in the config-template. I would suggest to do that with rosapps
> > and rostests, too. So you only need one checkout of rostests for
> > multiple base checkouts. You can probably do that with hardlinks but not
> > everyone can/wants to do that.
> > The libraries would only be rebuild if you update the SDK.
> >
> > Sources\
> >    \reactos-trunk\...
> >    \reactos-amd64\...
> >    \reactos-arwinss\...
> >    \reactos-sdk\
> >       \include\
> >       \lib\       <- static libs (crt, nt, ...) here
> >       \import\  <- spec files here
> >    \rosapps\
> >    \rostests\
> >
> > It would probably be a good idea to sync our headers / libs with
> > mingw-w64 as much as possible, so maybe some day we could actually
> > outsource the whole SDK.
> >
> > Other seperations like core / win32 / wine etc can be done in a similar
> way.
> > It would require to have multiple checkouts to compile, but I think
> > that's a reasonable efford.
> > Or all parts could be put into trunk/source/... then you can checkout
> > the whole folder if you don't want to hassle with multiple checkouts or
> > trunk/source/sdk/ and trunk/source/reactos seperately if you like.
> >
> > I would also suggest that "clean" command gets fixed. Currently it
> > always deletes all stuff from the specified source folder. Even if I am
> > executing it from a different checkout folder. That sucks. It should
> > only clean everything in the current folder. That way modules / the sdk
> > would not automatically be cleaned. Because that's in most cases not
> > what you want. A "clean all" could be used to clean all dependencies as
> > well.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Timo
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ros-dev mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ros-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev

Reply via email to