Thanks. I now realize that the output.dir property is specific to the
use of ant in the DITA Open Toolkit (http://dita-ot.sourceforge.net/)
and not a general ant thing. (That's what comes from trying to learn
both at once!)
Bob
-Original Message-
From: David Weintraub [mailto:[EMAIL PR
I can't find any reference that the property output.dir has any
special value. I've searched through the whole Ant manual, and found
two references to "output.dir". Both are used as examples for the name
of some output directory. You can always do this:
$ ant > ant.out.txt
Or if you're on Unix:
At several places, I need to build a fileset with the same properties.
Which files are included is likely to change, so I tried to use a
property to specify this:
My build.xml includes the following lines:
I wanted the output to go into the out directory, which I swear it was
doing yesterday, but today it's putting the output into out/samples. Can
anyone tell me how to specify that I want it to go into the out
directory and not a subdirec
Perhaps the facility that spawns the targets could manage the screen/buffer
output. This would mean that some facility would have to exist similar to named
pipes in Unix. This way, console output would be directed from the buffer (or
pipe) that had first output while other targets would be produ
Chuck Holzwarth wrote:
[...]
How do you propose to handle potential fatal/non fatal errors? If target a
exits due to an error, should there be an option to kill a or allow it to
complete (similar to failonerror="yes/no")? If both a and (b,c) must succeed
for d, should a be killed if b or c fails
It may be better to stay away from a grammar that gives the rules and use
something like:
...
How do you propose to handle potential fatal/non fatal errors? If target a
exits due to an error, should there be an option to kill a or allow it to
complete (similar to failonerror="yes/no
--- Klaus Malorny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Oh, have to have a look at that. If I change the
> semantic this has to be
> > made explicit ...
> > (It can be done because you have to specify the
> executor for your own
> > ...)
> >
> > "Ant tries to execute the t
I think there is indeed plenty of build scripts that rely on the order of the
target in the depends attribute (we can
maybe even talk of pattern). So clearly a parallelisation it must be explicit.
To make it explicit, I liked the use of '|' replacing the ',' as mentioned
earlier.
However, I'm
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh, have to have a look at that. If I change the semantic this has to be
made explicit ...
(It can be done because you have to specify the executor for your own
...)
"Ant tries to execute the targets in the depends attribute in the order
they appear (from left to right)
Yeah,
I think Ant needs to clean up the definition of the depends attribute.
The current definition for 'depends' leads to 2 kinds of dependencies, taking
the example below :-
1) a depends upon b & c.
This is an explicit dependency, and is persistent for the life-time of the Ant
script - it
> >>
> >> If such a dependency did exist, it should be incorporated in
> >> the depends attribute of the 'b' & 'c' target declarations.
> >
> > Thats the meaning - unordered list.
> >
> >
> >> Assuming in the example above that targets b, c & d have no
> >> dependencies of their own, they sho
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Isn't this the default behaviour anyway?
No - there is no multithreading by default.
That's why I write the ParallelExecutor.
If such a dependency did exist, it should be incorporated in
the depends attribute of the 'b' & 'c' target declarations.
Thats the meanin
> Isn't this the default behaviour anyway?
No - there is no multithreading by default.
That's why I write the ParallelExecutor.
>
> If such a dependency did exist, it should be incorporated in
> the depends attribute of the 'b' & 'c' target declarations.
Thats the meaning - unordered list.
Isn't this the default behaviour anyway?
Should not be interpretted as " 'a' depends on 'b' then 'c' then 'd' ", as that
would imply that 'b' depended up 'c', which in turn depended upon 'd'.
If such a dependency did exist, it should be incorporated in the depends
attribute of the 'b' & 'c' ta
Bart Bruggeman wrote:
>
> click on http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41958 cause
> and find out the cause of your problem or try the next code snippet:
>
> The following snippet:
>
>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com
I am just writing at the moment and want to commit that into Ants sandbox
"parallelexecutor" ;)
My basic idea is:
- each target should run in its own thread
- each thread could start if all dependent thread stopped successfully
Ant is relying on Java 1.3, but for better concurrency support I am u
You have use the name of the property and not the value of the property - :
Peter
On Dec 17, 2007 4:52 PM, Dan Vint <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Some more info. It appears that is not working.
> SO I have this
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Re
Hi,
with the increased availability of multi-core systems, I am wondering whether
there are ways to improve the capabilities of Ant to parallelize the build
process. While it is possible to execute tasks in parallel within a target, it
seems to not be simple to execute multiple targets in parall
Some more info. It appears that is not working.
SO I have this
Results in:
[echo] rest book isset: true
[echo] reset book istrue: ${status2}
Can anyone explain this result?
thanks
..dan
At 08:25 AM 12/17/2007, Dan Vint wrote:
I'm trying to use properties to cont
I'm trying to use properties to control the processing within my
script. I have several conditions that I want to test and based on
them to stop further processing.
I think my problem lies with the not-set condition and how to handle
this. I don't see anything in the documentation that indicat
21 matches
Mail list logo
