четверг, 8 августа 2013 г., 0:48:04 UTC+4 пользователь Chris Peterson написал:
> Why does the OS/2 port need a different build system? I'm not familiar > > with OS/2 development, but is GNU Make not an option? If it were only GNU Make it wouldn't be such a problem (we have quite a recent GNU Make port). But it's not, most problems come from the autoconf side and the tool chain expected by it. OS/2 is not *nix and not all tools are at current versions (some are not maintained at all). There are also many problems related to the ltmain script hell as well. Also, things on OS/2 are pretty much constant to the extent that many configure tests are redundant and just waste build time. Besides that, there are several things about the way how the original build system is structured that I don't like. One of them is putting many headers to the build dir instead of including them from their original locations which requires to run the build process from the root when one of these headers is changed (in order to re-export it) which is quite time consuming. In general, partial building from subdirectories (which I use very often during my development) is not well supported. kBuild solves all these problems. It's a much more clean (and usually also a faster) solution. I'd wish to see Mozilla moved to it cross platform -) (well, it will actually be a piece of cake once the switch for OS/2 is done — kBuild is cross-platform per se and includes a tool chain for each supported platform). _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
