Hi there, On 12 August 2011 06:20, Norbert Thiebaud <nthieb...@gmail.com> wrote: > I had an unexpectedly hard time moving oox into tail_build... I > tinkered with it fours hours, build after build to get it to 'work'... > but in the end I'm getting tunnel visioned. > Hmm, indeed, there are many things to do it seems. Maybe we should let tail_build like it is now and concentrate on improving gbuild implementation and gbuildizing modules and when it will be prepared, add more modules. Anyway, there is not much to add now.
Example of possible todo: in http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=662c49c020420a878f8feb488ff9b0dc3c0d8a9f is added animations api just because of dependency but we don't need to change include paths. Maybe $(eval $(call gb_Library_add_package_headers,sd,animations_inc)) would be better but I think it's meant just for internal module's headers because I found: define gb_LinkTarget_add_package_headers $(foreach package,$(2),$(call gb_LinkTarget__add_internal_headers,$(1),$(call gb_Package_get_target,$(package)))) $(call gb_LinkTarget_get_clean_target,$(1)) : $(foreach package,$(2),$(call gb_Package_get_clean_target,$(package))) endef what probably means that when you run make clean in sd you would also remove animations' headers ? So probably we need to add something for headers dependencies when they are not implied by linked libraries ? Or there already is something. For now add_api is woking but I'm not sure it is the right thing. I'm afraid there is more to do. Regards, Matúš PS: if someone wants, would be really nice to gbuildize desktop _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
