[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [cdt-dev] Managed Make Builder configurations
|
Alex,
This is something that we are definitely interested in in MontaVista. I
just didn't have the time to look into yet to see how to solve the
issue. But we share the same problematic...
I am willing to have a look at it but if you come up with a proposal it
would be even better ;)
I was wondering also how to do that without breaking the MMB schema but
couldn't find a way yet. Your basic approach was the only which occurs
to me yet but I am worried that some folks find that not acceptable.
Anyway, if just for me, I am fine with it ;)
Pierre-Alexandre
On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 15:53, Alex Chapiro wrote:
> I'm working around Managed Make Builder (MMB) Build configurations.
> Below I try to describe briefly the problem how I understand it and
> possible approach.
> In MMB, configuration is now one-dimention element (its only parameter
> is variant - debug/release/custom_variants). It could be useful (for
> cross-platform development especially) to have more configuration
> parameters such as build target architecture, target OS etc. So in
> MMB schema for abstract build targets I would like to have a set of
> attributes (such as CPU, OS, Variant, make target binary type - so, a,
> exe). This set of attributes can be different for different abstract
> build targets (for example, VC target maybe does not care about target
> OS and CPU). Each particular build configuration references to one of
> defined abstract build targets and can be distinguished by combination
> of inherited attributes, for example
>
> Configuration_1: Linux/X86/Shared Lib/Debug
> Configuration_2: Linux/x86/Archive/MyVariant
>
> Attributes and their values also define configuration definition dialog
> layout.
>
> It seems to be important because each attribute impacts all tool chain,
> not only compiler or linker, so it should be defined on the
> configuration level.
>
> I don't want to describe now the details of possible solution. I just
> was wondering if this can be interesting to anybody else. If nobody care
> about that, I'll be looking for other way that doesn't impact existing
> MMB schema and API.
>
> Thanks
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
