|
| Re: Evolution of the CDT build environment...comments? [message #24737 is a reply to message #24694] |
Wed, 17 April 2002 19:00  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: dominic.nospam.com
finally ...
"Jeff Turnham" <turnham@ca.ibm.com> wrote in message
news:a9kebs$mcr$1@rogue.oti.com...
> Hi All,
>
> Currently the CDT is built and packaged through the use of makefiles. This
> has worked quite well for us, but is becoming clear that we need to
revisit
> this scheme. At the highest level, we have 2 build requirements:
>
> REQUIREMENT #1 - Ability to build the CDT from within the Eclipse PDE
> (Plugin Development Environment).
>
> Ideally each of our plugins would contain the configuration files
necessary
> to build them with a minimum of user intervention. Any user should be able
> to checkout our code from CVS, or use the source shipped with our releases
> and be able to build the plugins without having to do much more than set a
> variable or 2. Meeting this requirement should be a relatively simple
matter
> of setting up the CDT in the PDE and then making sure the generated
> configuration files are generic enough for all users before checking them
> in.
>
> REQUIREMENT #2 - Ability to build the CDT from the command line (outside
> eclipse).
>
> This would be used by our nightly build process and users who prefer to
work
> with external editors and command line tools. While our makefile
environment
> is sufficient to build our code, it does not currently build the debugger
> (com.ibm.debug) or the editor (com.ibm.lpex). Both of these components are
> built by other teams who then provide us with packages containing jars and
> zipped source. The builds of these components are NOT based on makefiles
and
> it is not reasonable for us to suggest that they now implement and support
a
> makefile based environment just for use in the CDT. Instead it appears
that
> the emerging "standard" for building plugins from the command line is Ant
> (http://jakarta.apache.org/ant/).
>
> So the proposal is that we move from a makefile based build environment to
> an Ant-based one. I must confess that I have not yet used Ant but my
survey
> of the documentation indicates that all the function currently in our
> makefiles could be easily reproduced as Ant tasks.
>
> If there any readers who have any comments, we would love to hear them...
>
> Thanks...
>
> Jeff.
>
>
>
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03334 seconds
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
