Re: build.pl debug=1 for sw and svx

On 06.04.2011 19:47, Michael Stahl wrote:
> On 06/04/2011 18:45, tora - Takamichi Akiyama wrote:
>> Hello Christian,
>>
>> On 2011/04/06 20:55, Christian Lippka wrote:
>>> While Niklas and Daniel are absolutely right, make clean may not always
>>> be what you want.
>>>
>>> For example, if you just want to rebuild svx with debug and do a
>>> make -sr clean, your next make in sw module would rebuild a lot of
>>> stuff, since all dependency to svx would fire.
>
> actually, for a module like svx it shouldn't rebuild any cxx files in
> dependent modules (which takes up most of the time), because gbuild will
> preserve the timestamp of the original file when delivering.
>
> of course if headers are *generated*, then dependent cxx files will be
> rebuilt.
>
> hmm... on second thought, if you actually use the top-level makefile, then
> probably the cxx files will be rebuilt in this case... :(

If "in this case" means: "if there are generated headers", this is true. 
And IMHO it's the only way a sane build system should work. A build 
system that relies on "manual" evaluation of dependencies by developers 
(as the build.pl/dmake combo) is insane. Dependency evaluation is what 
make tools and files are made for.

In case of svx/sw the generated header files svxslots.hxx and 
globlmn.hrc cause some rebuilds in sw. Perhaps this is a good starting 
point to think about better dependencies. Files like these and the way 
we are using them are annoying. We can do better.

globlmn.hrc is doomed once we get the work to get rid of context menu 
resource files finished.
In case we moved all slot files into a single module and build them only 
if sdi files have changed, the second problem would be solved also. This 
would treat sdi files pretty much like idl files.

The number one reason why changing header files causes too much rebuilds 
is that our classes and thus our header files are too large (so that 
"including only what you need" doesn't work), that we have still too 
much nested includes and that superfluous includes in source files 
rarely get removed.

Regards,
Mathias

-- 
Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer
OpenOffice.org Engineering at Oracle: http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS
Please don't reply to "[email protected]".
I use it for the OOo lists and only rarely read other mails sent to it.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe send email to [email protected]
For additional commands send email to [email protected]
with Subject: help