Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Documentation: gprbuild --build-script #2

Open
briot opened this issue Nov 28, 2018 · 3 comments
Open

Documentation: gprbuild --build-script #2

briot opened this issue Nov 28, 2018 · 3 comments
Labels
question Further information is requested

Comments

@briot
Copy link

briot commented Nov 28, 2018

README should document that the list of commands can be generated from

 `gprbuild --build-script=smkfile.txt -Pproject.gpr`

That will need two initial compilations: one via gprbuild to get the list of gcc commands, then one via smk so that it detects dependencies.

Another issue with the above is that gprbuilxd passes -gnatem and -gnatec, using temporary files which will no longer exist the next time smk is run. This likely should be reported to AdaCore since I believe the goal of that switch is to produce reproducible builds, which we can't do if they don't explain what they put in those temporary files (mapping and configuration pragmas). If they explain, smk would be able to reproduce that presumably.

@LionelDraghi
Copy link
Owner

Hello Emmanuel,
I'm not sure to understand why would you use smk instead of gprbuild for rebuild.
Are you sure it would better any performance?
Sound's more complex to me, I'm not sure the balance is in favor of this!

@briot
Copy link
Author

briot commented Nov 28, 2018

You are probably right. I have been fighting with gprbuild a lot lately because it sometimes doesn't recompile as it should, so I was looking around for other application builder tools. Some provide very nice approaches, but they are all missing gprbuild's convenience when it comes to describing a project.
Still, showing --build-script might get people to experiment a bit with smk more easily

@LionelDraghi LionelDraghi added the question Further information is requested label Nov 30, 2018
@mgrojo
Copy link
Contributor

mgrojo commented Dec 6, 2018

The same could be said for make -B -n. For simple Makefiles it could work, and it would make sense if one wants to give up with a broken make build.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
question Further information is requested
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants