[libvirt] [PATCH] Ant build script to compile, doc, package, rpm

[Bryan Kearney]

Daniel Veillard wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 08:02:16AM -0400, Bryan Kearney wrote:
> 
>  Humpf ....
> 
> 
>> diff --git a/build.xml b/build.xml
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..e1ee51f
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/build.xml
>> @@ -0,0 +1,82 @@
>> +<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
>> +<project name="Libvirt Java Bindings" default="build">
>> +	<property file="build.properties"/>
>> +	<property name="jar" value="libvirt-${version}"/>
>> +	<property name="jar.file" value="target/${jar}.jar"/>	
>> +	<property name="src" value="libvirt-java-${version}"/>
>> +	<property name="src.file" value="target/${src}.tar.gz"/>
>> +	<property name="spec" value="libvirt-java.spec"/>	
>> +	<property name="spec.file" value="target/${spec}"/>	
> 
>   Do we really need to switch to ant ? I mean I love XML but that
> really wasn't designed for that kind of stuff, really !
> 
>> +	
>> +	<path id="compile.classpath">	
>> +		<fileset dir="/usr/share/java">
>> +			<include name="jna.jar"/>
>> +		</fileset>		
>> +	</path> 
> 
>   As a result this makes an huge change in the way things are processed
> or generated. I'm unable to really assert if it is really positive for
> the project and Java devel or will give us more problem down the line.
>   I think in the end my opinion is probably not very important as I'm
> not a Java head, but I'm still left wondering !


I believe that ant is more "typical" to java build then the autobuild 
tooling. In addition, with the removal of the c code.. much of the 
makefile magic from autobuild is no longer needed. I am happy to discuss 
  moving it back to autobuild if this is a big issue.

-- bk