You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> on 2013/05/22 00:04:22 UTC
Help needed! questions and confusion about "partial build" information
We are seeing a fair number of folks who want to work on a specific aspect
or module of AOO. This is not unexpected, of course.
This is the information for how to do partial builds from the new Build
Guide:
[1]
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO#Partial_Builds
This is the information from the old Tools information:
[2a] http://www.openoffice.org/tools/build_env_tools.html
[2b] http://www.openoffice.org/tools/tools/build.html
I actually used the "build --all:<prjname>" for what I was doing...
So my questions.
I don't know if new developers should necessarily know if a change is
compatible or not.
Would just ONE set of instructions in the Building Guide work for both
cases?
...and
Would the dmake instructions work for both dmake and make? (Something I
think is probably another point of confusion for new developers.)
...and
Could we use a syntax that is more like what is found in [2b] for all cases?
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"You can't believe one thing and do another.
What you believe and what you do are the same thing."
-- Leonard Peltier
Re: Help needed! questions and confusion about "partial build" information
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 7:00 AM, Andre Fischer <aw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 22.05.2013 00:04, Kay Schenk wrote:
>
>> We are seeing a fair number of folks who want to work on a specific aspect
>> or module of AOO. This is not unexpected, of course.
>>
>> This is the information for how to do partial builds from the new Build
>> Guide:
>>
>> [1]
>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Documentation/Building_**
>> Guide_AOO#Partial_Builds<http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO#Partial_Builds>
>>
>> This is the information from the old Tools information:
>>
>> [2a] http://www.openoffice.org/**tools/build_env_tools.html<http://www.openoffice.org/tools/build_env_tools.html>
>> [2b] http://www.openoffice.org/**tools/tools/build.html<http://www.openoffice.org/tools/tools/build.html>
>>
>> I actually used the "build --all:<prjname>" for what I was doing...
>>
>> So my questions.
>>
>> I don't know if new developers should necessarily know if a change is
>> compatible or not.
>> Would just ONE set of instructions in the Building Guide work for both
>> cases?
>>
>
> Well, yes. You can always do a clean build. But that is probably not
> what you mean.
no...it isn't. I guess I didn't make myself clear.
In the current "new" Building Guide [1], there are different build
instructions for "Compatible" vs "Incompatible" builds.
There is also this statement:
IncompatibleUse for code changes that modify exported C++ or IDL
interfaces, that modify resources that are used by other modules, or when
you are not sure.
What I'm saying is that I would think new developers would always use
instructions for "Incompatible" build because it is likely they are not
sure. So, we can change the wording to somehow explain this.
Ok, so we can deal with this aspect.
What about the dmake vs make business? Or, should the "Compatible" build
information be put someplace else -- like in "Advanced Topics" or
something, toward the bottom? Maybe I will just make these kinds of changes
and see what everyone thinks. :/
> But: the motivation to do a compatible build is to have turn around times
> as small as possible. This can only be achieved by
>
> a) improving our build system or
>
> b) by taking shortcuts
>
> Option b) requires you to provide additional knowledge. That is usually
> of the form: I changed file X.cxx in <module> but I know/believe/are fairly
> certain that only library Y.dll has to be rebuild and nothing else.
> Afterwards you have to copy Y.dll (or Y.so or Y.dylib ...) into your
> office installation.
> In other words, you have to know what you are doing. Otherwise use the
> standard mechanism and be patient :-)
>
> I agree that this should be better documented. Both the technical steps
> (building one directory/library, copying this library into an installed
> office)
AHA! Yes, we are definitely missing this piece! OK, I will make changes to
the current Building Guide, and put in a section for this, which,
hopefully, someone can augment with this very important information.
> and the rules of thumb when to build just one library or a whole module or
> everything.
Agreed...thanks for your input.
>
>
>> ...and
>>
>> Would the dmake instructions work for both dmake and make? (Something I
>> think is probably another point of confusion for new developers.)
>>
>
> To some degree we already have that. For example call 'build debug=t' in
> the top-level directory of a dmake or gbuild module and the module is built
> with debug information.
>
> -Andre
>
>
>
>> ...and
>>
>> Could we use a syntax that is more like what is found in [2b] for all
>> cases?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<de...@openoffice.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"You can't believe one thing and do another.
What you believe and what you do are the same thing."
-- Leonard Peltier
Re: Help needed! questions and confusion about "partial build" information
Posted by Andre Fischer <aw...@gmail.com>.
On 22.05.2013 16:25, janI wrote:
> On 22 May 2013 16:00, Andre Fischer <aw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 22.05.2013 00:04, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>
>>> We are seeing a fair number of folks who want to work on a specific aspect
>>> or module of AOO. This is not unexpected, of course.
>>>
>>> This is the information for how to do partial builds from the new Build
>>> Guide:
>>>
>>> [1]
>>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Documentation/Building_**
>>> Guide_AOO#Partial_Builds<http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO#Partial_Builds>
>>>
>>> This is the information from the old Tools information:
>>>
>>> [2a] http://www.openoffice.org/**tools/build_env_tools.html<http://www.openoffice.org/tools/build_env_tools.html>
>>> [2b] http://www.openoffice.org/**tools/tools/build.html<http://www.openoffice.org/tools/tools/build.html>
>>>
>>> I actually used the "build --all:<prjname>" for what I was doing...
>>>
>>> So my questions.
>>>
>>> I don't know if new developers should necessarily know if a change is
>>> compatible or not.
>>> Would just ONE set of instructions in the Building Guide work for both
>>> cases?
>>>
>> Well, yes. You can always do a clean build. But that is probably not
>> what you mean. But: the motivation to do a compatible build is to have
>> turn around times as small as possible. This can only be achieved by
>>
>> a) improving our build system or
>>
>> b) by taking shortcuts
>>
>> Option b) requires you to provide additional knowledge. That is usually
>> of the form: I changed file X.cxx in <module> but I know/believe/are fairly
>> certain that only library Y.dll has to be rebuild and nothing else.
>> Afterwards you have to copy Y.dll (or Y.so or Y.dylib ...) into your
>> office installation.
>> In other words, you have to know what you are doing. Otherwise use the
>> standard mechanism and be patient :-)
>>
>> I agree that this should be better documented. Both the technical steps
>> (building one directory/library, copying this library into an installed
>> office) and the rules of thumb when to build just one library or a whole
>> module or everything.
>>
>>
>>> ...and
>>>
>>> Would the dmake instructions work for both dmake and make? (Something I
>>> think is probably another point of confusion for new developers.)
>>>
>> To some degree we already have that. For example call 'build debug=t' in
>> the top-level directory of a dmake or gbuild module and the module is built
>> with debug information.
>>
>> -Andre
>>
> I might be lazy, but when even if I only change a single file, I run build
> --all, please remember in many cases (not all modules).
Yes, that is the safe way. And if you make an incompatible change it
still may not be enough. If you really want to be on the safe side then
you should do a 'build --prepare --from <module>' first.
>
> I have ubuntu running in virtualbox with win7 as host (ugly I know it), and
> build -all take 4minutes 12 seconds...and then I am sure everything is
> correct.
1) There are cases of incompatible changes where 'build --all' would not
be enough
2) When you change a file that eg requires sw to be rebuild then even on
Linux it will probably take longer.
3) On Windows takes a lot longer. And if you do a lot of debugging then
the Window platform with its Developer Studio becomes a lot more attractive.
4) 4 minutes is still a long time to wait when you do it often enough.
-Andre
>
> rgds
> jan I.
>
>
>>> ...and
>>>
>>> Could we use a syntax that is more like what is found in [2b] for all
>>> cases?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<de...@openoffice.apache.org>
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Help needed! questions and confusion about "partial build" information
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
On 22 May 2013 16:00, Andre Fischer <aw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 22.05.2013 00:04, Kay Schenk wrote:
>
>> We are seeing a fair number of folks who want to work on a specific aspect
>> or module of AOO. This is not unexpected, of course.
>>
>> This is the information for how to do partial builds from the new Build
>> Guide:
>>
>> [1]
>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Documentation/Building_**
>> Guide_AOO#Partial_Builds<http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO#Partial_Builds>
>>
>> This is the information from the old Tools information:
>>
>> [2a] http://www.openoffice.org/**tools/build_env_tools.html<http://www.openoffice.org/tools/build_env_tools.html>
>> [2b] http://www.openoffice.org/**tools/tools/build.html<http://www.openoffice.org/tools/tools/build.html>
>>
>> I actually used the "build --all:<prjname>" for what I was doing...
>>
>> So my questions.
>>
>> I don't know if new developers should necessarily know if a change is
>> compatible or not.
>> Would just ONE set of instructions in the Building Guide work for both
>> cases?
>>
>
> Well, yes. You can always do a clean build. But that is probably not
> what you mean. But: the motivation to do a compatible build is to have
> turn around times as small as possible. This can only be achieved by
>
> a) improving our build system or
>
> b) by taking shortcuts
>
> Option b) requires you to provide additional knowledge. That is usually
> of the form: I changed file X.cxx in <module> but I know/believe/are fairly
> certain that only library Y.dll has to be rebuild and nothing else.
> Afterwards you have to copy Y.dll (or Y.so or Y.dylib ...) into your
> office installation.
> In other words, you have to know what you are doing. Otherwise use the
> standard mechanism and be patient :-)
>
> I agree that this should be better documented. Both the technical steps
> (building one directory/library, copying this library into an installed
> office) and the rules of thumb when to build just one library or a whole
> module or everything.
>
>
>> ...and
>>
>> Would the dmake instructions work for both dmake and make? (Something I
>> think is probably another point of confusion for new developers.)
>>
>
> To some degree we already have that. For example call 'build debug=t' in
> the top-level directory of a dmake or gbuild module and the module is built
> with debug information.
>
> -Andre
>
I might be lazy, but when even if I only change a single file, I run build
--all, please remember in many cases (not all modules).
I have ubuntu running in virtualbox with win7 as host (ugly I know it), and
build -all take 4minutes 12 seconds...and then I am sure everything is
correct.
rgds
jan I.
>
>> ...and
>>
>> Could we use a syntax that is more like what is found in [2b] for all
>> cases?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<de...@openoffice.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: Help needed! questions and confusion about "partial build" information
Posted by Andre Fischer <aw...@gmail.com>.
On 22.05.2013 00:04, Kay Schenk wrote:
> We are seeing a fair number of folks who want to work on a specific aspect
> or module of AOO. This is not unexpected, of course.
>
> This is the information for how to do partial builds from the new Build
> Guide:
>
> [1]
> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO#Partial_Builds
>
> This is the information from the old Tools information:
>
> [2a] http://www.openoffice.org/tools/build_env_tools.html
> [2b] http://www.openoffice.org/tools/tools/build.html
>
> I actually used the "build --all:<prjname>" for what I was doing...
>
> So my questions.
>
> I don't know if new developers should necessarily know if a change is
> compatible or not.
> Would just ONE set of instructions in the Building Guide work for both
> cases?
Well, yes. You can always do a clean build. But that is probably not
what you mean. But: the motivation to do a compatible build is to have
turn around times as small as possible. This can only be achieved by
a) improving our build system or
b) by taking shortcuts
Option b) requires you to provide additional knowledge. That is usually
of the form: I changed file X.cxx in <module> but I know/believe/are
fairly certain that only library Y.dll has to be rebuild and nothing
else. Afterwards you have to copy Y.dll (or Y.so or Y.dylib ...) into
your office installation.
In other words, you have to know what you are doing. Otherwise use the
standard mechanism and be patient :-)
I agree that this should be better documented. Both the technical steps
(building one directory/library, copying this library into an installed
office) and the rules of thumb when to build just one library or a whole
module or everything.
>
> ...and
>
> Would the dmake instructions work for both dmake and make? (Something I
> think is probably another point of confusion for new developers.)
To some degree we already have that. For example call 'build debug=t'
in the top-level directory of a dmake or gbuild module and the module is
built with debug information.
-Andre
>
> ...and
>
> Could we use a syntax that is more like what is found in [2b] for all cases?
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org