"Dimitrie O. Paun" dimi@intelliware.ca writes:
On Tue, 30 Sep 2003, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
I thought the build tag (which can be any one-line string) was enough. Why do we need anything else?
That works nicely IF Jakob builds the tests only on official releases
Why? The current simple scheme of setting it to the date should work if we do not build twice in 24 hours. If that is not enough, we can include a full CVS time specification down to seconds, as I said, it is a simple tag, not parsed, not used for anything except matching.
(which should happen anyway).
Why, again?
In fact, the build script can be smart enough to notice if we're not using an offcial release, and provide a different build tag.
Yes, it should include the full CVS date then, not a big deal. Yeah, when summarizing an offical release, I can provide LXR links as an extra.
-- a simple to generate format would be: [...]
It can't be that hard: we mainly have to for dll in $DLLS echo "*** $dll" ver=`cvs status $file | grep Working | awk '{print $3}'` for file in dlls/$dll/tests echo " * $file $ver" echo "MinGW:" compile_file_with_MinGW echo "MSVC:" compile_file_with_MSVC done wine dlls/$dll/tests/$dll_test.exe.so done
Well, the trick is in the compile_file_with_* routines. The MinGW way is specified in the Makefiles, how would you incorporate them? The MSVC way is in the .dsp-s, which is even worse. Then you can not invoke $dll_test.exe.so, because MinGW results in $dll_crosstest.exe while MSVC in something else again. One more thing, although the present build system ensures (AFAICT) that every .c file corresponds to a test, it may not forever be the case. And errors are more frequent in the linking phase anyway.
So, what I find reasonable is capturing the whole make output in a file for every unit, and publishing it on the condition that the make fails. It would be easy for MinGW and possibly impossible for MSVC, I do not have a clue about that. Sad to say this. Also this is the reason I mentioned tar. Not for the reports, but for the master files, which could avoid the mailing list anyway. To be honest, I fail to see the point of the mailing list. These reports are rather unsuitable for human consumption (strictly IMO).
we really need to automate the build procedure, I don't think manual stuff will cut it.
Can do with MinGW, for sure. But for MSVC??
In fact, the build procedure should be included in our makefiles, and we can invoke it automatically on a new Wine release through the make_release script...
Fine vision, I am sold on it, although I would like to provide a way to make more frequent builds.
Feri.