[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Axiom-commit] [Axiom-developer] Re: SF.net SVN: axiom: branche
Gabriel Dos Reis
Re: [Axiom-commit] [Axiom-developer] Re: SF.net SVN: axiom: branches/build-improvements/src
18 Nov 2006 04:42:18 +0100
Gabriel Dos Reis <address@hidden> writes:
| "Bill Page" <address@hidden> writes:
| | On November 17, 2006 8:26 PM Gabriel Dos Reis
| | >
| | > address@hidden writes:
| | >
| | > | Revision: 266
| | > | http://svn.sourceforge.net/axiom/?rev=266&view=rev
| | > | Author: whebisch
| | > | Date: 2006-11-15 12:29:45 -0800 (Wed, 15 Nov 2006)
| | > |
| | > | Log Message:
| | > | -----------
| | > | Make preloading of databases effective
| | > |
| | > ...
| | > This patch seems to have broken build-improvements: Many of the
| | > components are no longer built, in particular the regression test
| | > is not longer run.
| | That's odd. I built Axiom on Nov 15 19:04 from the build-improvements
| | repository (Revision: 274) on the axiom-developer.org server with no
| | problems - at least none that I noticed. The build log shows that
| | the regression tests were all run and Axiom seems to work fine in
| | simple manual confidence tests.
| | What components in particular were not built?
| graph, sman, hyper and input.
False alarm -- they are built "early".
I think I have a better understanding than I had three hours ago.
The last test I did was with revision 283.
In that revision, the whole AXIOMsys seems to be built twice:
(1) once as usual
- then the testsuite is run
(2) and a second time
- this time it is not tested any more.
- this time, the other component are not built
I think it is wrong not to test the second time AXIOMsys is built (it
is the one that is installed). We would need an explanation of why
AXIOMsys needs to be built twice -- the first time it is tested, and the
second time it is not.
The dependencies are wrong somewhere but I don't know yet where.
Furthermore, I come realize that the rule
(cd ../interp && $(ENV) $(MAKE) axiomsys)
is no good. Because by the time the build flow reaches src/etc/ we may
already have done lot of things on the way (and we do). Now, it looks
like src/etc wants to ask AXIOMsys to be rebuilt a second time,
without necessarily "making" other things that might depend on it.
That is no good. We should not have the rule written that way.
I think we must take a step back and lay down what is that the patch
is trying to achieve. And do that in a more controlled way.
The "generic" errors from hyperdoc are of the form:
xpressionSpace((odd? ((Boolean) %))): Unexpected HT command: \spad
These may actually be not related to the patch. Sorry for that.