Bug 17507 – [ports] Script to ease port maintenance when adding/removing files

• Component: Tools / Tests
• Status: RESOLVED FIXED

[Kevin Ollivier]

As discussed several times on #WebKit, it would be nice to have a script that allowed you to add/remove a file in one place, and have a way to automatically propagate that change to all the build systems, rather than manually make the change for each build system. This should considerably reduce the number of post-commit build fixes needed for ports, leaving more time to make WebKit even slicker. :)

[Kevin Ollivier]

Created attachment 19314 [details]
First attempt at a script that can update wx, GTK and Qt at once

This script generates a file called WebCore/sources.inc for inclusion in GTK and Qt makefiles that defines BASE_SOURCES, which is a complete list of platform-independent sources that all ports should build. This file is obtained by parsing and manipulating the WebCore/WebCoreSources.bkl file. (Chosen because of my familiarity with XML parsing and because we explicitly kept base sources separate from platform-dependent sources.) The idea is that this file will be included by the Qt and GTK makefiles, then by doing SOURCES += BASE_SOURCES those files will be added to those build systems. 

This is just to open things up for discussion and show how one approach might work. I'm not very familiar with building other ports, so I would really appreciate it if people working on other port build systems could chime in and let me know if this idea is feasible and/or suggest some ideas of other ways we could approach this.

[Darin Adler]

Comment on attachment 19314 [details]
First attempt at a script that can update wx, GTK and Qt at once

rs=me --We don't need a really close review of scripts.

However, it would be good if our scripts were consistently in one scripting language; I hate to require multiple ones. Maybe you would take on the project of converting our Perl scripts to Python?

[Kevin Ollivier]

(In reply to comment #2)
> (From update of attachment 19314 [details] [edit])
> rs=me --We don't need a really close review of scripts.
> 
> However, it would be good if our scripts were consistently in one scripting
> language; I hate to require multiple ones. Maybe you would take on the project
> of converting our Perl scripts to Python?

I would be willing to take on such a project. It would probably take me a while to convert all that code over while still working on the wx port, but so long as you're okay with that, I have no problems. I personally think it's worth the effort, and it's my policy never to pass up an opportunity to code in Python. :)

So, should I file a meta-bug for this and post scripts for review one-by-one as I convert them, or is there a better way to approach this? 

[Darin Adler]

(In reply to comment #3)
> So, should I file a meta-bug for this and post scripts for review one-by-one as
> I convert them, or is there a better way to approach this? 

If it was me, I'd just create a new bug each time.

[Kevin Ollivier]

landed in r31795, thanks! :-)