Cmake result differences

[Bernd Blaauw]

I was wondering why the Cmake results are different between the 
Windows/ReactOS and Unix/Linux platforms. The compressed trunk CD images 
available for download differ by about 6MB.

Expecting identical output (checksums, file sizes) on different 
platforms even with the same compiler isn't realistic ofcourse but above 
mentioned 6MB is a bit much.

Creating dbgwin-builds makes sense, but if the Unix builder builds 
faster and smaller builds, and makes them earlier available for 
download, what's the point in making the Windows build available 
publicly? Would it make more sense to offer MSVC builds if 
license-technical allowed? Or automated builds of CLT-type (combined 
installCD + liveCD) ?

Bernd

[Kamil Hornicek]

Dbg-win ISOs contain winetests, hence their bigger size. Also if you 
compare build times (http://build.reactos.org/waterfall) you will find 
out that the windows build slave is faster than the linux one, so 
dbg-win builds are actually available sooner despite their size.

K.

Dne 28.2.2012 21:18, Bernd Blaauw napsal(a):
>   I was wondering why the Cmake results are different
> between the
>  Windows/ReactOS and Unix/Linux platforms. The compressed trunk CD images
>  available for download differ by about 6MB.
>
>  Expecting identical output (checksums, file sizes) on different
>  platforms even with the same compiler isn't realistic ofcourse but above
>  mentioned 6MB is a bit much.
>
>  Creating dbgwin-builds makes sense, but if the Unix builder builds
>  faster and smaller builds, and makes them earlier available for
>  download, what's the point in making the Windows build available
>  publicly? Would it make more sense to offer MSVC builds if
>  license-technical allowed? Or automated builds of CLT-type (combined
>  installCD + liveCD) ?
>
>  Bernd
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  Ros-dev mailing list
>  Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
>  http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev

[Bernd Blaauw]

Op 29-2-2012 12:09, Kamil Hornicek schreef:
>   Dbg-win ISOs contain winetests, hence their bigger
> size. Also if you
>  compare build times (http://build.reactos.org/waterfall) you will find
>  out that the windows build slave is faster than the linux one, so
>  dbg-win builds are actually available sooner despite their size. 
Thank you for your detailed explanation about additional (test-)files 
causing the majority of the size difference. Then the Windows build is 
more complete (if preferred to be so called) while the Linux build is 
faster to download, thus justifying both being available.

Were Arwinss binaries planned to be bundled or perhaps offered as a 
separate ISO? People might consider the removal of Rbuild generated 
downloads as an opportunity to offer an other/additional type of build 
instead.

Bernd

[Sylvain Petreolle]

De : Bernd Blaauw <bblaauw(a)home.nl>

À : ReactOS Development List <ros-dev(a)reactos.org> 
>  Envoyé le : Mercredi 29 février 2012 22h29
> Objet : Re: [ros-dev] Cmake result differences
>  
> Were Arwinss binaries planned to be bundled or perhaps offered as a separate ISO? People
> might consider the removal of Rbuild generated downloads as an opportunity to offer an
> other/additional type of build instead.
>
> Bernd
>

[Sylvain Petreolle]

De : Bernd Blaauw <bblaauw(a)home.nl>

À : ReactOS Development List <ros-dev(a)reactos.org> 
>  Envoyé le : Mercredi 29 février 2012 22h29
> Objet : Re: [ros-dev] Cmake result differences
>  
> Op 29-2-2012 12:09, Kamil Hornicek schreef:
> >   Dbg-win ISOs contain winetests, hence their
> > bigger size. Also if you
> >  compare build times (http://build.reactos.org/waterfall) you will find
> >  out that the windows build slave is faster than the linux one, so
> >  dbg-win builds are actually available sooner despite their size. 
> Thank you for your detailed explanation about additional (test-)files causing the majority
> of the size difference. Then the Windows build is more complete (if preferred to be so
> called) while the Linux build is faster to download, thus justifying both being
> available.
>
> Were Arwinss binaries planned to be bundled or perhaps offered as a separate ISO? People
> might consider the removal of Rbuild generated downloads as an opportunity to offer an
> other/additional type of build instead.
>
> Bernd
>  
The Arwinss builds are available on SourceForge:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/reactos/files/Arwinss/

[Bernd Blaauw]

Op 1-3-2012 1:04, Sylvain Petreolle schreef:

>   The Arwinss builds are available on SourceForge:
>  http://sourceforge.net/projects/reactos/files/Arwinss/ 
Thanks for pointing those test releases out. I guess the rate of changes 
and limited number of build machines might make an each-revision (just 
like Cmake live and bootcds) out of the question. Same for MSVC builds 
and the (highly?) experimental 64bit builds.

[Zachary Gorden]

Last I heard there was no automated mechanism to build an arwinss
image.  Aleksey has been copying arwinss binaries by hand into a
vanilla ROS build before making the image.  Until someone with enough
motivation automates this, the rate of arwinss updates will remain at
the current pace.

On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Bernd Blaauw <bblaauw(a)home.nl> wrote:
>   Op 1-3-2012 1:04, Sylvain Petreolle schreef:
>
>
> >   The Arwinss builds are available on SourceForge:
> >  http://sourceforge.net/projects/reactos/files/Arwinss/ 
>
>  Thanks for pointing those test releases out. I guess the rate of changes and
>  limited number of build machines might make an each-revision (just like
>  Cmake live and bootcds) out of the question. Same for MSVC builds and the
>  (highly?) experimental 64bit builds.
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  Ros-dev mailing list
>  Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
>  http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev

[Aleksey Bragin]

This is not true anymore (at least last 6 or more months). I have a 
local working copy which allows conditional building of either "trunk" 
or "arwinss" win32 subsystem DLLs and win32k.sys.
Changes are, of course, not committed. But building arwinss ISO is as 
easy as typing "makex bootcd".

WBR,
Aleksey.

On 01.03.2012 22:19, Zachary Gorden wrote:
>   Last I heard there was no automated mechanism to build
> an arwinss
>  image.  Aleksey has been copying arwinss binaries by hand into a
>  vanilla ROS build before making the image.  Until someone with enough
>  motivation automates this, the rate of arwinss updates will remain at
>  the current pace.
>
>  On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Bernd Blaauw<bblaauw(a)home.nl>  wrote:
> > Op 1-3-2012 1:04, Sylvain Petreolle schreef:
> >
> >
> >> The Arwinss builds are available on SourceForge:
> >> http://sourceforge.net/projects/reactos/files/Arwinss/
> >
> > Thanks for pointing those test releases out. I guess the rate of changes and
> > limited number of build machines might make an each-revision (just like
> > Cmake live and bootcds) out of the question. Same for MSVC builds and the
> > (highly?) experimental 64bit builds.
> >

[Zachary Gorden]

Doesn't do the rest of us much good in that case. :p

On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Aleksey Bragin <aleksey(a)reactos.org> wrote:
>   This is not true anymore (at least last 6 or more
> months). I have a local
>  working copy which allows conditional building of either "trunk" or
>  "arwinss" win32 subsystem DLLs and win32k.sys.
>  Changes are, of course, not committed. But building arwinss ISO is as easy
>  as typing "makex bootcd".
>
>  WBR,
>  Aleksey.
>
>
>  On 01.03.2012 22:19, Zachary Gorden wrote:
> >  
> >  Last I heard there was no automated mechanism to build an arwinss
> >  image.  Aleksey has been copying arwinss binaries by hand into a
> >  vanilla ROS build before making the image.  Until someone with enough
> >  motivation automates this, the rate of arwinss updates will remain at
> >  the current pace.
> >
> >  On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Bernd Blaauw<bblaauw(a)home.nl>  wrote:
> > >
> > > Op 1-3-2012 1:04, Sylvain Petreolle schreef:
> > >
> > >
> > >> The Arwinss builds are available on SourceForge:
> > >> http://sourceforge.net/projects/reactos/files/Arwinss/
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks for pointing those test releases out. I guess the rate of changes
> > > and
> > > limited number of build machines might make an each-revision (just like
> > > Cmake live and bootcds) out of the question. Same for MSVC builds and the
> > > (highly?) experimental 64bit builds.
> > > 
>  _______________________________________________
>  Ros-dev mailing list
>  Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
>  http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev