ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
Subject Re: Fwd: Re: Patternsets, Filesets, and Mapper
Date Mon, 04 Mar 2002 21:42:10 GMT
> Well, you could do it inside a <script> task instead. (Or write a separate
> task.)

Nod, I currently have that mapping thing this is Subject'd after... how difficult and
clean is the scripting?

> I didn't know you were setting up your build this way -- I just figured
> you'd have everything in a main build file. Is there some reason you're
> not?  I used generic names like "classfiles" because I have no idea what
> your actual names would be, but I assumed you'd just adopt things to your
> needs, supplying the various filesets, along with meaningful id names,
> property names, etc.

Well, java is one of the directories in the build. The main build is controlled by
(n)make.  They call into the java directory and execute a Makefile there. I am changing
our Makefile to just call Ant with options.  However, there is the main build file which
handles javac,rmic,javah automatically for the whole source tree (about 800 files).  Then,
for each project/application, it executes a sub-build file that is maintained by the
person running that project/application.  This one handles the

> There's nothing in Ant that's making you use 21 files. You can write
> everything out to the same file, just use distinctive names for the
> fileset ids and properties. Or don't write a file at all, and just use
> <script> or a separate task to do the string manipulations.

The 21 files (as per your suggestion or the includesfile section) is because each
sub-build file (7 of them) each have 3 lists of files.

> But hey, if you'd prefer using your modified version of Ant instead, go
> for it. (I used an in-house version for a long time, until things finally
> caught up to where I could pitch mine. But it does make upgrading a little
> dicey.)

I know I can use the modified version, but it is a real pain (ie: have to repatch
everything everytime we want to add another patch).  It would be better to use something
standardized so that people after me can have some clue how the process works.

> Yeah -- don't have seven different build files, and if you don't want to
> write things out to a file, use <script> (or a separate task) to do the
> string diddling. (I did a sample script that does that awhile back, so I
> can play with that to do your stuff -- but only if you're seriously
> interested in finding a way to do this with standard Ant.)

If the scripting is clean, easy, and effecient -- then I am open to it...  Otherwise, it
would be hard to push Ant as a better solution.

Thanks for all the patience and help,

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message