Re: [PATCH] Allow JavaHL to be installed separately from main Subversion package (was: Re: [PATCH] Fix cross-library installation dependencies for libsvn_fs and libsvn_fs_base)

[Greg Hudson <gh...@MIT.EDU>]

On Sun, 2004-09-19 at 04:33, David James wrote:
> This patch fixes the JavaHL installation process so that you can
> install JavaHL separately from the base subversion package. It does
> this by keeping track of the installation dependencies for the
> libsvn_fs and libsvn_ra libraries.

Committed, thanks.

I'm actually interested in the methodology of your first patch, which
split up the install rules into one rule for each file.  Obviously we
can't use the timestamps of what's in the installed area, but having a
separate install rule for each library would mean that (a) we could get
rid of the five separate library types in favor of a single "lib" type,
and (b) we could stop relying on "make" evaluating dependencies in
order, so that our Makefile would have a hope of operating in parallel
mode.  (Not that one would ever really want to use "make -j install",
but it's still more elegant not to rely on dependency order.)

Since we can't use files from the install area as rule targets, the
separate rule for each file would have to be a fake target name like
install-<filename>.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: [PATCH] Allow JavaHL to be installed separately from main Subversion package (was: Re: [PATCH] Fix cross-library installation dependencies for libsvn_fs and libsvn_fs_base)

[David James <st...@gmail.com>]

> I'm actually interested in the methodology of your first patch, which
> split up the install rules into one rule for each file.  Obviously we
> can't use the timestamps of what's in the installed area, but having a
> separate install rule for each library would mean that (a) we could get
> rid of the five separate library types in favor of a single "lib" type,
> and (b) we could stop relying on "make" evaluating dependencies in
> order, so that our Makefile would have a hope of operating in parallel
> mode.  (Not that one would ever really want to use "make -j install",
> but it's still more elegant not to rely on dependency order.)
> 
> Since we can't use files from the install area as rule targets, the
> separate rule for each file would have to be a fake target name like
> install-<filename>.
Great idea. Anyone opposed to me implementing this?

Cheers,

David

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org