View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
jeremy_c
Joined: 09 Apr 2005 Posts: 16 Location: Ohio, USA
|
Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2005 7:21 pm Post subject: Building 2.0 on Linux, 1 problem |
|
|
Just figured I would let you know of one problem I have when building build on Linux. It is easily solved, so here it is:
Code: |
$ make -f Makefile.unix
make: *** No rule to make target `util/bmscanner.d', needed by `build'. Stop.
$ mv util/BMscanner.d util/bmscanner.d
$ make -f Makefile.unix
|
Now all works fine, so it was just BMscanner.d in the .ZIP file.
Also, can I make a suggestion? When unziping a zip, tar.gz or any archive file, I expect that it will make a directory of the project name. Instead build extracts to trunk. I have see others do that here on dsource.org.
I would *highly* recommend that it should extract to the project name and version, in this case: build-2.0 ... That would make life much easier on the users part (I think).
BTW... thank you very much! I'm using build on the D DBI project. It's a great tool.
Jeremy
http://jeremy.cowgar.com[/code] |
|
Back to top |
|
|
afb
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 Posts: 137 Location: Sweden
|
Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2005 1:47 am Post subject: Re: Building 2.0 on Linux, 1 problem |
|
|
jerc wrote: |
Also, can I make a suggestion? When unziping a zip, tar.gz or any archive file, I expect that it will make a directory of the project name. Instead build extracts to trunk. I have see others do that here on dsource.org.
I would *highly* recommend that it should extract to the project name and version, in this case: build-2.0 ... That would make life much easier on the users part (I think). |
You can safely assume that when you download a zip file, it will:
- have a weird name (dmd.120.zip, mango_release_1-3.zip, etc)
- will not have an enclosing directory, but expand in the trunk
- the textfiles will have DOS line endings (\r\n)
This is opposed to the regular UNIX tarballs, which are:
- will be named: name-version.tar.gz (or .tar.bzip2)
- will always have a directory named "name-version"
- will have text files with UNIX line endings (\n)
http://en.tldp.org/HOWTO/Software-Release-Practice-HOWTO/distpractice.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Derek Parnell
Joined: 22 Apr 2004 Posts: 408 Location: Melbourne, Australia
|
Posted: Sun Apr 17, 2005 10:53 pm Post subject: Re: Building 2.0 on Linux, 1 problem |
|
|
jerc wrote: | Just figured I would let you know of one problem I have when building build on Linux. It is easily solved, so here it is:
Code: |
$ make -f Makefile.unix
make: *** No rule to make target `util/bmscanner.d', needed by `build'. Stop.
$ mv util/BMscanner.d util/bmscanner.d
$ make -f Makefile.unix
|
Now all works fine, so it was just BMscanner.d in the .ZIP file.
|
Fixed. I renamed the file to all lowercase, as it should have been.
jerc wrote: |
Also, can I make a suggestion? When unziping a zip, tar.gz or any archive file, I expect that it will make a directory of the project name. Instead build extracts to trunk. I have see others do that here on dsource.org.
I would *highly* recommend that it should extract to the project name and version, in this case: build-2.0 ... That would make life much easier on the users part (I think).
|
I'll consider it.
When I unzip a file, I always create a directory for it to go into. I don't rely on the creater of the ZIP file to have done the right thing by following convention. _________________ --
Derek
skype name: derek.j.parnell |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jeremy_c
Joined: 09 Apr 2005 Posts: 16 Location: Ohio, USA
|
Posted: Tue Apr 19, 2005 12:23 pm Post subject: Re: Building 2.0 on Linux, 1 problem |
|
|
Derek Parnell wrote: |
I'll consider it.
When I unzip a file, I always create a directory for it to go into. I don't rely on the creater of the ZIP file to have done the right thing by following convention. |
When thinking about this, think of package maintainers too. On Linux, it is virtually unheard of for a file *not* to extract into a directory packagename-version. Therefore, many package managers unzip and change to that directory.
It makes it very difficult for some systems to build packages without alot of human intervention. I use ArchLinux and have to twist and warp it's build system to make it build a package for build so others can use the package. It's no fun. The DMD compiler is worse, only providing a download of dmd.zip with no version number. Build systems look in the cache and see that they already have dmd.zip (the old version) and don't download the latest.
Please consider the naming convention strongly for the sake of making the tool more package friendly, which in turn, will hopefully make it available with ease on many Linux systems (oh, NetBsd is the same way).
Jeremy |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Derek Parnell
Joined: 22 Apr 2004 Posts: 408 Location: Melbourne, Australia
|
Posted: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:34 pm Post subject: Re: Building 2.0 on Linux, 1 problem |
|
|
jerc wrote: | When thinking about this, think of package maintainers too. On Linux, it is virtually unheard of for a file *not* to extract into a directory packagename-version. Therefore, many package managers unzip and change to that directory.
|
Just checking to see if I've got it right...
If I'm releasing version 2.03 of the Build utility, I should name the ZIP file "build-2.03.zip", and where I've currently got "trunk" as the top level directory in that ZIP, I should rename that to "build-2.03". _________________ --
Derek
skype name: derek.j.parnell |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Derek Parnell
Joined: 22 Apr 2004 Posts: 408 Location: Melbourne, Australia
|
Posted: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:53 pm Post subject: Re: Building 2.0 on Linux, 1 problem |
|
|
jerc wrote: | When thinking about this, think of package maintainers too. On Linux, it is virtually unheard of for a file *not* to extract into a directory packagename-version. Therefore, many package managers unzip and change to that directory.
|
Just checking to see if I've got it right...
If I'm releasing version 2.03 of the Build utility, I should name the ZIP file "build-2.03.zip", and where I've currently got "trunk" as the top level directory in that ZIP, I should rename that to "build-2.03". _________________ --
Derek
skype name: derek.j.parnell |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Carlos
Joined: 19 Mar 2004 Posts: 396 Location: Canyon, TX
|
Posted: Tue Apr 19, 2005 7:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There's a problem building build on linux: source.d, line 286. It says "lNextMod". I think it should be "lNextModule". I made that change and it seemed to work. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jeremy_c
Joined: 09 Apr 2005 Posts: 16 Location: Ohio, USA
|
Posted: Tue Apr 19, 2005 7:38 pm Post subject: Re: Building 2.0 on Linux, 1 problem |
|
|
Derek Parnell wrote: |
Just checking to see if I've got it right...
If I'm releasing version 2.03 of the Build utility, I should name the ZIP file "build-2.03.zip", and where I've currently got "trunk" as the top level directory in that ZIP, I should rename that to "build-2.03". |
Yes, you have it right.
Jeremy |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jeremy_c
Joined: 09 Apr 2005 Posts: 16 Location: Ohio, USA
|
Posted: Tue Apr 19, 2005 8:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
2.03 looks great! Thanks! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|