Yes that might already hit it, when it's properly implemented.
Though I think a physical seperation might add some additional advantages, especially when
it comes to managing an increasing mass of resources.

One thing that has bugged me when working with the x64 branch was that everything depends on so much other stuff.
It's not possible to disable the apps folder, as the dll folder depends on it and vice versa. Some hacking was required
So I added the usermode rbuild switch. still you can't just remove/diable something. And when you want to clean parts of your
local copy, you will have to rebuild or at least relink all stuff that depends on it.

make ntdll clean
make
will relink all usermode dlls :(

So moving the import libraries to an sdk module group would unlink the modules and make it easier to
build/clean parts of them without effecting the others.

And for some reason, changing one rbuild file will at random times lead to a recompile of rbuild which will then lead to a recompile of everything else. and that sucks a lot.

ok it finally ends up with ranting about rbuild....

Aleksey Bragin schrieb:

It might be implemented as a subset of "make XXX", where XXX would be  
that core, drivers or anything like that - but all from one tree,  
just a different sets. Otherwise than that, splitting them physically  
into different modules is going to only hurt the development, not  
make it easier. I already thought about that, but I'm afraid it won't  
work.


Oh, actually, Marc Piulachs already implemented all of that in his  
platform builder, so he's able to pick necessary modules with a click  
of a mouse, and produce an installation CD consisting of such  
"modules", and it indeed works. It just is not separated physically  
in the tree itself.


WBR,
Aleksey Bragin.

On Mar 9, 2009, at 4:20 AM, Timo Kreuzer wrote:

I would even like to go one step further in the long run.

The current situation is that rosbuild takes about 10 minutes for a  
build. With adding more code and more modules to our codebase, this  
time will increase. If we wanted to do something like auto- 
rejecting commits that break build it would lock the commit process  
for this time on every commit.

Also as we get more developers and maybe start forming teams or  
whatever, things will get problematic with our current "monolithic"  
approach.

We should think of changing the build process, so that not the  
whole system is rebuild everytime someone changes one module.
We currently treat reactos like one huge module, but it isn't. It's  
a bunch of more or less independent things. A change in a usermode  
dll should not lead to an notskrnl recompile, it just doesn't make  
sense and only wastes time.

I think it would be better to seperate the components from each  
other as much as possible and only compile the modules that have  
been changed.

Of cause all modules somehow depend on each other, but mostly  
through well defined interfaces. These are exposed by the headers  
and import libraries. And those 2 are the problem atm.
It might be a good idea to completely separate the sdk from the os  
itself. The sdk would contain both the headers and the spec files  
to build the import libraries. If we made sure these are in a good  
shape, we would eleminate most interdependencies as they should  
only rarely change.

We could try to split the current reactos tree into seperate trees,  
maybe like this:
sdk: headers, import library definitions, crt
core: rtl, freeldr, hal, ntoskrnl, boot drivers, ntdll, smss
drivers: other hardware drivers
win32core: win32k, video drivers, gdi32, user32, csrss
win32dll: the other win32 dlls
sound: everything related to sound
network: everything related to network
reactx
services
apps

Some of these trees could be optional, like network, sound, reactx
It might even allow to create a bootable core system without win32  
stuff, booting into a simple native console.
Working with branches might as well profit from this.

Just my 2 cents,
Timo


_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev@reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev