Re: WIP - MSVC build script replacements

Here are the latest versions. ECPG regression still isn't working, but
then it isn't on my machine with the .bat file either. I don't know yet
if that's my fault or the script's or something else.

I'm inclined to commit these without changing the .bat files in the
first instance, so people can get them easily to try out.

cheers

andrew

Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>> Here after much tedious testing are some perl replacements for
>> src/tools/msvc/build.bat and src/tools/msvc/vcregress.bat, as
>> previouslty discussed on -hackers. They do not exhibit the error
>> reporting problems I have had on XP, and they work nicely with a
>> slightly modified buildfarm script. There is one failure - the ECPG
>> checks fail to build. The error I get is shown below - not sure why on
>> earth it can't find MSVCRT.lib.
>>
>
> Does it work on the same machine with the .bat file?
>
>
>
>> There are also a few things to tidy up before I commit this, but I'm
>> happy because it has proved much less fragile than the existing scripts
>> in cooperating with the buildfarm. I am also turning my attention to
>> fixing the use of "dir" in Install.pm.
>>
>
> Not having tested it yet, but looked over.
>
> Does the
> #!c:/perl/bin/perl
> actually make any sense? Does it even work?
>
>
> Should it system("mkvcbuild")? Shouldn't it rather use Mkvcbuild; and go
> from there? Seems a whole lot cleaner, and that's why we nade Mkvcbuild
> a module in the first place.
>
>
>
> As for vcregress, code like:
> my $schedule = shift
> ||(($what eq 'CHECK' || $what =~ /PARALLEL/) ? "parallel" : "serial" );
>
> is quite hard for me to read, but that could be because I'm not fluent
> in advanced perl :P Perhaps simplify a bit for those of us? ;) (I
> perfectly understand what it does after thinking about it a bit, but I
> have to think and not just read. And since this is a very simple piece
> of code after all.)
>
> Not sure I like the getTests vs GetTests. Sure, it's case sensitive, but
> again with the easy-to-read.
>
> (and usage: foo, but I'm sure you knew that)
>
>
> Other than that, looks fine to me.
>
> //Magnus
>
>