[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Classpathx-discuss] ANT and JUNIT issues (automake???)

From: Olivier LF
Subject: Re: [Classpathx-discuss] ANT and JUNIT issues (automake???)
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 21:59:54 +1100
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.23i

On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 09:37:27AM -0000, Nic Ferrier wrote:
> There is NO issue with using ANT for builds if you want.
> However, you MUST provide an autoconf/make based build. All the existing
> project (except crypto, but they're working on it) provide autoconf based
> builds.
> Autoconf is the GNU standard for building things and personally I prefer it.
> It's also a lot easier to integrate with native libraries, which is more
> important when you're compiling with gcj.

Actually I have some questions about classpathx Makefiles.

First I should introduce myself. My name is Olivier, I have done some 
marginal work for gnu-crypto (on the Makefile actually).

Yes, I agree Autoconf is the GNU standard and yes it is better for
shared libraries... but this is only when combined with Automake!

The Makefiles I have seen so far on classpathx are everything but
standard. Following is my current list of issues:

- Automake is not used, that cut short a number of expected targets such 
    make dist
    make install
    make uninstall

  plus a lot of missing functionalities that automake takes care of:

    building outside of the source tree:
       ../activation/configure   }
       make                      }  from a tmp directory outside the
       make install              }  project.

    Shared libraries (for gcj), automake does all the work with only
    3 lines of input.

- The current does a bulk compilation of all the source
  files. I don't know about that approach outside of traditional (.class) 
  compilers. Using gcj, I am not sure you can compile all sources in a 
  single (.o) file. In any case that does not look right. Typically
  you'd like one object per package. Also automake generates the classic
  one java file --> one object type of compilation that is not optimum

I'll be happy to post a tar file with the autoconf/automake layer for
gnu-crypto if anyone is interested. It supports javac, jikes and gcj
and build both jar and shared libraries for the gcj compilation.

I have to say that I am a bit reluctant to replace it with the current
classpathx Makefile approach.



Olivier Louchart-Fletcher
Email: address@hidden

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]