Closed
Bug 73353
(requires)
Opened 24 years ago
Closed 17 years ago
Clean up our MODULE/REQUIRES story
Categories
(Core :: General, defect)
Core
General
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
People
(Reporter: jag+mozbugs, Assigned: jag+mozilla)
Details
(Whiteboard: [not needed for 1.9] leaving untargetted to avoid perpetual spamming.)
Attachments
(5 files, 17 obsolete files)
(deleted),
patch
|
bryner
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
(deleted),
patch
|
dbaron
:
review+
dbaron
:
superreview+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
(deleted),
patch
|
dbaron
:
review+
dbaron
:
superreview+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
(deleted),
patch
|
dbaron
:
review+
dbaron
:
superreview+
brendan
:
approval1.9+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
(deleted),
patch
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
Since these lines are (supposed to be) used to determine inter-module
relationships, it's best to keep the list minimal. It's quite a bit of work
though to keep track of modules no longer needed (where, if you need a new one,
the compiler on a MOZ_TRACK_MODULE_DEPS build will let you know).
A friend of mine wrote a little script which looks at the .deps/*.pp files to
determine which modules were needed, compares that against what's currently
listed on the REQUIRES line, and gives output in the form of a cvs diff -u.
I've applied this patch to a fresh tree, and built with it successfully.
I'll attach the patch for review.
Reporter | ||
Comment 1•24 years ago
|
||
Reporter | ||
Comment 2•24 years ago
|
||
Making dbaron the QA contact on this. doron, hope you don't mind :-)
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
QA Contact: doronr → dbaron
Reporter | ||
Comment 4•24 years ago
|
||
Comment 5•24 years ago
|
||
r=dbaron on that, assuming it builds :-)
I guess anything it breaks should be fixed by a conditional (or even just
commented) |REQUIRES += ...|.
Reporter | ||
Comment 6•24 years ago
|
||
Changing the summary, I'll just use this as a tracker.
Summary: Remove cruft from REQUIRES lines → Clean up our MODULE/REQUIRES story
Reporter | ||
Comment 7•24 years ago
|
||
Reporter | ||
Comment 9•24 years ago
|
||
Reporter | ||
Comment 10•24 years ago
|
||
After doing a clobber build it turned out I needed to fix these two too:
embedding/base/Makefile.in
rdf/tests/rdfcat/Makefile.in
Doing a "find -name 'Makefile.in' | xargs grep MODULE" from mozilla/gfx:
./idl/Makefile.in:MODULE = gfx
./idl/Makefile.in:XPIDL_MODULE = gfx
./src/ps/Makefile.in:MODULE = gfx
./src/qt/Makefile.in:MODULE = layout
./src/gtk/Makefile.in:MODULE = gfx
./src/mac/Makefile.in:MODULE = layout
./src/os2/Makefile.in:MODULE = layout
./src/beos/Makefile.in:MODULE = layout
./src/xlib/Makefile.in:MODULE = layout
./src/xlibrgb/Makefile.in:MODULE = xlibrgb
./src/xlibrgb/Makefile.in:XPIDL_MODULE = layout
./src/motif/Makefile.in:MODULE = layout
./src/rhapsody/Makefile.in:MODULE = layout
./src/Makefile.in:MODULE = gfx
./src/photon/Makefile.in:MODULE = layout
./src/xprint/Makefile.in:MODULE = gfx
./tests/Makefile.in:MODULE = gfx
./public/Makefile.in:MODULE = gfx
What should I do with all those other MODULE lines?
Comment 11•24 years ago
|
||
This might be a question for drivers. Can gfx really be separated from layout?
I think everything under gfx should be set to MODULE = gfx.
Comment 12•24 years ago
|
||
gfx doesn't (shouldn't) have any direct dependancies on layout. It should be
able to build without it.
Reporter | ||
Updated•24 years ago
|
Assignee: jag → jaggernaut
Status: ASSIGNED → NEW
Reporter | ||
Comment 13•24 years ago
|
||
Mass move to jaggernaut@netscape.com
Updated•24 years ago
|
Whiteboard: leaving untargetted to avoid perpetual spamming.
Assignee | ||
Comment 14•23 years ago
|
||
Comment 15•23 years ago
|
||
r=cls on attachment 43229 [details] [diff] [review]
Comment 16•23 years ago
|
||
Nice. r=dbaron.
Assignee | ||
Comment 17•23 years ago
|
||
Comment 18•23 years ago
|
||
Don't you have to add XPIDL_MODULE in some places (or change packaging files,
but I'd prefer not)? Are there any static build issues?
Assignee | ||
Comment 19•23 years ago
|
||
I checked for idl files but there are none where I change the MODULE name.
Btw, I talked to Dauphin and we agreed on putting everything in the "content"
MODULE, instead of all the seperate ones. I'm also tempted to change the
existing "xul", "xuldoc" and "xultmpl" over to "content" and add XPIDL_MODULE
there to keep the right .xpts.
I don't know what the impact of this is on the static build though. Waterson?
Comment 20•23 years ago
|
||
There should be no impact.
Assignee | ||
Comment 21•23 years ago
|
||
Comment 22•23 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 46749 [details] [diff] [review]
[patch] intermediate clean-up.
r=cls
Attachment #46749 -
Flags: review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 23•23 years ago
|
||
Comment 24•23 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 49309 [details] [diff] [review]
Instead of adding "gfx" to manager/ssl/src/Makefile.in, I'll just remove a #include "nsIWidget.h" ;-)
r=bryner
Attachment #49309 -
Flags: review+
Updated•23 years ago
|
Attachment #49309 -
Flags: superreview+
Comment 25•23 years ago
|
||
i checked in attachment 49309 [details] [diff] [review].
Assignee | ||
Comment 26•23 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 27•23 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 49311 [details] [diff] [review]
Move gfx from module layout to module gfx and fix REQUIRES lines.
r=cls in e-mail
Attachment #49311 -
Flags: review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 28•23 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 29•23 years ago
|
||
Comment 30•23 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 49667 [details] [diff] [review]
Y'all are gonna love this!
this patch was checked in with sr=alecf on Sep 18.
Stop confusing my module owner.
And don't touch extensions/transformiix/build/Makefile.in
until we moved to static libs for building.
Comment 31•23 years ago
|
||
> And don't touch extensions/transformiix/build/Makefile.in
> until we moved to static libs for building.
So should we remove it from the build until then? Tree-wide changes often need
to be made everywhere at once.
Assignee | ||
Comment 32•23 years ago
|
||
Pike: I haven't touched anything transformiix after you mentioned it to me, but
thanks for reminding me and making it public so others know too :-)
Assignee | ||
Comment 34•21 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Updated•21 years ago
|
Attachment #126627 -
Flags: superreview?(alecf)
Comment 35•21 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 126627 [details] [diff] [review]
Clean-up 2003-06-27
wow, so many great cleanups :)
I'll apply this on linux, see what happens.
Attachment #126627 -
Flags: superreview?(alecf) → superreview+
Assignee | ||
Comment 36•21 years ago
|
||
Attachment #28725 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #30047 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #30060 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #30548 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #43229 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #45485 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #46749 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #49309 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #49311 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #49667 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #53731 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #126627 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Assignee | ||
Comment 37•21 years ago
|
||
Attachment #127374 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Assignee | ||
Comment 38•21 years ago
|
||
Comment 39•21 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 127473 [details] [diff] [review]
Same as above, but diff -u for testing
r=cls
Attachment #127473 -
Flags: review+
Assignee | ||
Updated•21 years ago
|
Attachment #127472 -
Flags: superreview?(bryner)
Updated•21 years ago
|
Attachment #127472 -
Flags: superreview?(bryner) → superreview+
Assignee | ||
Comment 40•21 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 127473 [details] [diff] [review]
Same as above, but diff -u for testing
Noting sr=bryner, requesting approval. Risk is low, if anything breaks it'll
show up as build bustage on tinderboxen, easy enough to fix.
Attachment #127473 -
Flags: superreview+
Attachment #127473 -
Flags: approval1.5a?
Comment 41•21 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 127473 [details] [diff] [review]
Same as above, but diff -u for testing
Minusing for 1.5a approval, since (a) we're probably going to cut a branch
tomorrow (b) I'd rather not risk having the source tarball not be buildable in
unusual configurations that, which is a risk here. Sometimes bustage from this
type of thing for more unusual things doesn't show up for a few days.
Attachment #127473 -
Flags: approval1.5a? → approval1.5a-
Comment 42•21 years ago
|
||
Let's get this into 1.5b as soon as the trunk opens.
/be
Assignee | ||
Comment 43•20 years ago
|
||
Attachment #127472 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #127473 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Assignee | ||
Comment 44•20 years ago
|
||
Neil said this patch built for him on Linux.
Assignee | ||
Comment 45•20 years ago
|
||
Attachment #153454 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Updated•20 years ago
|
Attachment #159146 -
Flags: review+
Updated•20 years ago
|
Product: Browser → Seamonkey
Comment 46•20 years ago
|
||
Some additional cleanup, particularly for firefox/toolkit. Tested the
following build configurations:
linux firefox opt
windows firefox opt
mac firefopx opt
mac seamonkey debug + tests
Attachment #173314 -
Flags: superreview?(dbaron)
Attachment #173314 -
Flags: review?(dbaron)
Comment 47•20 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 173314 [details] [diff] [review]
patch
You probably don't want the intl/uconv/src/Makefile.in change (although you may
want to move the ucnative into the ifdef, so it's a REQUIRES += ucnative
line that doesn't get caught by this script)
Attachment #173314 -
Flags: superreview?(dbaron)
Attachment #173314 -
Flags: superreview+
Attachment #173314 -
Flags: review?(dbaron)
Attachment #173314 -
Flags: review+
Comment 48•20 years ago
|
||
Tested mac seamonkey, windows seamonkey, and windows thunderbird.
Attachment #173348 -
Flags: superreview?(dbaron)
Attachment #173348 -
Flags: review?(dbaron)
Updated•20 years ago
|
Attachment #173348 -
Flags: superreview?(dbaron)
Attachment #173348 -
Flags: superreview+
Attachment #173348 -
Flags: review?(dbaron)
Attachment #173348 -
Flags: review+
Assignee | ||
Updated•17 years ago
|
Alias: requires
Assignee: jag → nobody
Status: ASSIGNED → NEW
OS: Linux → All
Product: Mozilla Application Suite → Core
QA Contact: dbaron → general
Assignee | ||
Comment 49•17 years ago
|
||
Assignee: nobody → jag
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Attachment #299946 -
Flags: superreview?(dbaron)
Attachment #299946 -
Flags: review?(dbaron)
Assignee | ||
Comment 50•17 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 299946 [details] [diff] [review]
Passes TryServer (Firefox), and SeaMonkey and Thunderbird on Mac and Linux.
Ignore the non-Makefile.in changes, they're from peterv's patch on bug 407034 which make using trunk bearable. I'll attach one without them in a bit.
Assignee | ||
Comment 51•17 years ago
|
||
Attachment #299946 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #299946 -
Flags: superreview?(dbaron)
Attachment #299946 -
Flags: review?(dbaron)
Attachment #300043 -
Flags: superreview?(dbaron)
Attachment #300043 -
Flags: review?(dbaron)
Comment 52•17 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 300043 [details] [diff] [review]
Passes TryServer (Firefox), and SeaMonkey and Thunderbird on Mac and Linux. [checked in]
So I'm not so happy about ifdef'd REQUIRES changes -- they make it easy for somebody in one configuration to make a change that compiles fine (since they have that thing turned on) but that breaks for somebody with the feature off.
However, they are helpful for automatic testing of whether requires lines are still needed.
Maybe the best thing to do would be a compromise: comment rather than ifdef? Does that seem reasonable?
rubber-stamp r+sr=dbaron with that (or without it if you can convince me otherwise)
Attachment #300043 -
Flags: superreview?(dbaron)
Attachment #300043 -
Flags: superreview+
Attachment #300043 -
Flags: review?(dbaron)
Attachment #300043 -
Flags: review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 53•17 years ago
|
||
<dbaron> the places where you have ifdef ACCESSIBILITY
<dbaron> just say
<dbaron> # for ACCESSIBILITY
<dbaron> or something like that
<jag> If you're ok with that
<jag> We've always done the ifdef
<jag> I can change all locations to use the comment style.
<dbaron> I dunno.
<jag> Would you be ok with me doing that in a separate bug?
<dbaron> I guess it's ok the way you have it.
<dbaron> separate bug is ok, yeah
<dbaron> If it's not biting people maybe it's not even worth the bother.
Filed bug 418037 for further discussion.
Assignee | ||
Updated•17 years ago
|
Attachment #300043 -
Flags: approval1.9?
Comment 54•17 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 300043 [details] [diff] [review]
Passes TryServer (Firefox), and SeaMonkey and Thunderbird on Mac and Linux. [checked in]
jag is on the case on irc.
/be
Attachment #300043 -
Flags: approval1.9? → approval1.9+
Assignee | ||
Comment 55•17 years ago
|
||
So in certain cases people have been picking up header files from dist/sdk/include instead of from dist/include/$MODULE. This changes config.mk to only add dist/sdk/include when MOZ_ENABLE_LIBXUL is defined, and fixes up the various REQUIRES lines that were missing modules due to this. This builds on my Intel Mac Mini under SeaMonkey, Firefox, Thunderbird, Camino and XulRunner.
Comment on attachment 300043 [details] [diff] [review]
Passes TryServer (Firefox), and SeaMonkey and Thunderbird on Mac and Linux. [checked in]
1.148 jag%tty.nl 2008-02-18 00:50
Attachment #300043 -
Attachment description: Passes TryServer (Firefox), and SeaMonkey and Thunderbird on Mac and Linux. → Passes TryServer (Firefox), and SeaMonkey and Thunderbird on Mac and Linux. [checked in]
Comment on attachment 310745 [details] [diff] [review]
Another pass, this time also putting in missing modules.
This patch hasn't landed and is presumably holding this bug open. Can we spin this off to another bug? Drivers want all bugs with approval1.9+ closed ASAP.
Updated•17 years ago
|
Whiteboard: leaving untargetted to avoid perpetual spamming. → [patch with a+ landed, another without a unlanded] leaving untargetted to avoid perpetual spamming.
Updated•17 years ago
|
Whiteboard: [patch with a+ landed, another without a unlanded] leaving untargetted to avoid perpetual spamming. → [not needed for 1.9] leaving untargetted to avoid perpetual spamming.
Assignee | ||
Comment 58•17 years ago
|
||
Since bsmedberg wants to change the way this all works I've held off on getting that patch reviewed and checked in. I'm just gonna close this bug. I'll re-open it, or open a new one, if needed.
Assignee | ||
Updated•17 years ago
|
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 17 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Comment 59•7 years ago
|
||
Pushed by frgrahl@gmx.net:
https://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/rev/32e089cc6736
Clean up our MODULE/REQUIRES story. rs=dbaron, a=brendan
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•