[Lazarus] Lazarus 1.0 is branched

[waldo kitty]

On 4/5/2012 07:59, Marcos Douglas wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 11:17 PM, waldo kitty<wkitty42 at windstream.net>  wrote:
>> On 4/4/2012 21:18, Marcos Douglas wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 10:09 PM, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "make clean all" is the clean way.
>>>
>>> It's recommended if I have an error, right?
>>
>> ummm... noooo... please see the "lazbuild build IDE profiles" thread...
>
> Sorry. I think I still didn't understand what advantages to use
> lazbuild instead of IDE>Build

my bad, too... i was uncorrect saying "no" above... yes, "make clean all" is how 
you start from fresh and build all tools clean... i was trying to say "no" 
because "make clean" should already be run before "svn up" and so then "make 
all" is all that should be needed at that point...

advantages?

1. perform all update tasks from command line
2. no need to perform steps manually

at least those two... with what i've been doing, the goal has been to type 
"updatelaz" at the command line and then return some minutes later to find at 
least one shiny new lazarus.exe... with the current methods, there's four shiny 
new exe's with one chosen one being duplicated to the current lazarus.exe you 
want to run...

>>> We use "make clean all", get a default IDE and recompile again using
>>> pcp param to restart all configurations, components, etc. But I have
>>> to compile twice. Am I right?
>>
>> yes, there is that but if "make all" is not used, the one must know and call
>> all of the necessary make targets without the IDE one to get all the tools
>> built...
>
> And lazbuild do this, i.e., build ALL tools, sources and IDE (of course)?

i've not dug that deep into the multi-megabyte logs i've been generating but if 
memory serves, the tools are built with "make all" after "svn up"... i don't 
think they are built again after that... startlazarus might be but it should not 
be necessary... a quick peek at my (currently running) process shows that 
startlazarus is built when the default default lazarus.exe is built which is 
during "make all"...

>>>> In 99,9% of all svn revisions it is enough to rebuild the IDE via the
>>>> IDE.
>>
>> that's what my discussions in the "lazbuild build IDE profiles" thread are
>> all about... why have to manually go into the IDE to build a new IDE after a
>> svn update?? i start my "updatelaz" script which cleans the dirs, updates
>> from svn, and then does the building of the tools and lazarus... now that
>> things are working better, i can go have a cuppa' joe while everything does
>> all its churning and burning... on this particular workstation, that's about
>> 30 minutes or so... maybe more... maybe less...
>
> OK, I see at least one advantage to use lazbuild now: I can have ONE
> big script that clear, update and compile all sources and tools.

yes :)  but it need not be all that "big"... mine is currently 5kb plus a small 
kickstarter script for redirection capabilities but that's because it 
"beautifies" the redirection output with section headers and echoed command 
lines... strictly speaking, with no beautification or errorlevel checking, 
there's only three or four lines that do all the work plus one copy line... that 
give one default default exe and one personalized one...

> Maybe I'm totally wrong, but I don't see many other advantages. I
> don't update always -- I like to see what changed before update -- and
> the only difference between use the IDE instead lazbuild to compile is
> that the user have to run the IDE and click in Build -- and I can go
> have a cup of coffe -- and the lazbuild (working together with a big
> script) can be running with a single command.
> But you can change my mind.  =)

:) i, too, like to see what changed... this is why i always look at the "svn up" 
logs... however, i do not currently have any method in place to abort the script 
after doing "svn up"... at that point, make clean has already been run and the 
tools must be built new... of course, one can always run "svn up" manually and 
then later run the update script ;)

>>> OK.
>>> I compiled project ide/startlazarus.lpi and I got an error because the
>>> startlazarus.exe is running... of course. So, I started Lazarus
>>> without use startlazarus and I compiled again. Now I can see the
>>> splash updated.
>>
>> hummm... interesting...
>
> =)

yeah, i hadn't see that before... my understanding was that it started 
lazarus.exe and exited meaning that it shouldn't have still been in memory...