Problems with ALT_OUTPUTDIR in debug build

[Ted Neward]

But wait a minute, how often do people really do both builds in the same make step? How hard would it be for those who do to do something like

make product_build ALT_OUTPUTDIR=/opt/jdk7-product; make debug_build ALT_OUTPUTDIR=/opt/jdk7-debug; make fastdebug_build ALT_OUTPUTDIR=/opt/jdk7-fastdebug

? This seems totally reasonable to me, personally.

Ted Neward
Java, .NET, XML Services
Consulting, Teaching, Speaking, Writing
http://www.tedneward.com
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: build-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net [mailto:build-dev-
> bounces at openjdk.java.net] On Behalf Of Kelly O'Hair
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 1:24 PM
> To: Volker Simonis
> Cc: build-dev at openjdk.java.net
> Subject: Re: Problems with ALT_OUTPUTDIR in debug build
> 
> ALT_OUTPUTDIR=$(OUTPUTDIR)
> doesn't make sense to me.
> 
> The makefiles will define OUTPUTDIR to be equal to $(ALT_OUTPUTDIR) if
> ALT_OUTPUTDIR is set.
> The _OUTPUTDIR is the default build location, when ALT_OUTPUTDIR is not
> set.
> 
> The original idea here in setting ALT_OUTPUTDIR=$(_OUTPUTDIR)-
> $(DEBUG_NAME)
> was to put all the results of a debug build in a completely different
> directory, which I still think is right.
> I suspect this needs to be:
>     ALT_OUTPUTDIR=$(OUTPUTDIR)-$(DEBUG_NAME)
> 
> A long time ago, the debug files were built along side the normal
> files, and
> all debug files had that "_g" suffix (e.g. jvm_g.dll, etc.) but we
> completely
> got rid of that because it was a nightmare.
> The debug builds then just became a second pass over the source with
> the same
> makefiles but just a different output directory so they didn't mix.
> I'm afraid using ALT_OUTPUTDIR=$(OUTPUTDIR) will mix up the optimized
> files
> with the debug files, which won't be good.
> 
> -kto
> 
> Volker Simonis wrote:
> > I would suggest to fix the top-level  Makefile such that
> > COMMON_DEBUG_FLAGS uses $(OUTPUTDIR) instead of $(_OUTPUTDIR)
> > and doesn't append "-$(DEBUG_NAME)" to ALT_OUTPUTDIR like so:
> >
> > COMMON_DEBUG_FLAGS= \
> >         DEBUG_NAME=$(DEBUG_NAME) \
> >         ALT_OUTPUTDIR=$(OUTPUTDIR) \
> >         NO_DOCS=true
> >
> > We will than always end up with two directories like so:
> >
> > xxx
> > xxx-fastdebug
> >
> > if we used "ALT_OUTPUTDIR=xxx".
> >
> > "xxx-fastdebug" will always be empty (but needed if I follow your
> > previous post) so we can remove it after the build. But the user will
> > get the output in the directory he specified with ALT_OUTPUTDIR and
> > that seems crucial to me.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> > Volker
> >
> > On 1/10/08, Kelly O'Hair <Kelly.Ohair at sun.com> wrote:
> >> Your final paragraph I think is the answer:
> >>
> >>    "In my eyes, the cleanest solution would be if ALT_OUTPUTDIR
> would be honoured
> >>     "as is", as the output directory for everything we built,
> without anything
> >>     appended to it. So the developer should be free to choose
> whatever he wants as
> >>     the output directory. And there should be no additional
> directories created."
> >>
> >> The ongoing problem has been how to make this work in all cases.
> >> But I'm all for it.
> >>
> >> The generally accepted default for an output directory has been a
> ./build or
> >> ./dist directory at the top of the source tree you are building.
> >> With corba, jaxp, jaxws, langtools, hotspot all being independently
> buildable,
> >> what exactly are you recommending to fix this?
> >>
> >> -kto
> >>
> >> Volker Simonis wrote:
> >>>>> Any comments if this is the right way to do a debug build?
> >>>> If it works it's fine. I usually just run 'make debug_build', does
> that not work?
> >>>>
> >>> It works, but it has the problems that I detailed in my first mail.
> >>> Did you also read that one?
> >>> I may seem that my second mail contained the solution for the first
> >>> one, but that's not true, its justa partial workaround for the
> problem
> >>> described in the first one:
> >>>
> >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-dev/2008-
> January/000669.html
> >>>
> >>> Thanks and regards,
> >>> Volker
> 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.0/1218 - Release Date:
> 1/10/2008 1:32 PM
> 

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.0/1218 - Release Date: 1/10/2008 1:32 PM