From: "Russ Cox" <rsc@swtch.com>
To: weigelt@metux.de, 9fans@9fans.net
Subject: Re: [9fans] Modularizing plan9port
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 06:30:48 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080611132853.E4B821E8C1F@holo.morphisms.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080611124038.GA3004@nibiru.local>
> I'm going to modularize plan9port a bit.
>
> Ideally, each component (library, app, etc) should become it's
> completely own package.
I fail to see what is ideal about this.
Ask yourself whether you're doing this because it would
actually make your life easier or because of some
pre-conceived notion that software packaging should
be complex.
> So I intent do write some script which creates Makefile's from
> mkfile's and maybe even does some build-time configuration
> (sort of ./configure ;-)). That script(s) could be packet along
> with some other fundamental p9p build utils, and this package
> then would be the very first in depedency chain. Taking cross-
> builds into account, this would be an TOOL or HOST dependency,
> since it runs on the building host, not the target - an compiler-
> less target wouldn't ever need it (it plays in the same liga as
> tools like lex, make, autoconf, etc).
>
> What do you think about this approach ?
I think you are wasting your time.
There's no need to fiddle with the build structure:
you could still require the whole tree to build things
and then just split up the post-build tree.
Then you don't have to worry about rewriting Makefiles
or adding your own configure scripts or other horrors.
I certainly won't take any of that back into the main tree.
If you just want to create a package for the Linux du jour,
just build the tree and then make it one big package.
If that would be too large a package, you could reasonably
split it into four:
28/12 font $PLAN9/font
68/27 bin $PLAN9/bin and $PLAN9/lib/lib*.a
20/4 src $PLAN9/src
18/6 base everything else
The numbers are MB, uncompressed and compressed.
Splitting out bin/lib makes it easy to swap in binaries for
a different architecture. Splitting out src (or font) makes
those files easy to drop if you need to scrimp on disk space.
There's not much point to anything more fine-grained.
Russ
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-11 13:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-11 12:40 Enrico Weigelt
2008-06-11 12:47 ` erik quanstrom
2008-06-11 13:05 ` Jeff Sickel
2008-06-11 13:30 ` Russ Cox [this message]
2008-06-11 15:30 ` Enrico Weigelt
2008-06-11 15:43 ` Uriel
2008-06-11 15:46 ` Uriel
2008-06-11 17:53 ` Enrico Weigelt
2008-06-11 18:23 ` Russ Cox
2008-06-11 20:42 ` Roman Shaposhnik
2008-06-11 20:48 ` Enrico Weigelt
2008-06-11 20:57 ` William Josephson
2008-06-11 21:30 ` Russ Cox
2008-06-12 14:09 ` Enrico Weigelt
2008-06-11 19:28 ` Iruata Souza
2008-06-11 17:33 ` tlaronde
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080611132853.E4B821E8C1F@holo.morphisms.net \
--to=rsc@swtch.com \
--cc=9fans@9fans.net \
--cc=weigelt@metux.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).