Closed Bug 614366 Opened 9 years ago Closed 9 years ago

separate binary finding logic from automation-build.mk

Categories

(Firefox Build System :: General, defect)

defect
Not set

Tracking

(Not tracked)

RESOLVED FIXED

People

(Reporter: k0scist, Assigned: k0scist)

References

Details

Attachments

(2 files)

Currently, the only way to find the binary location in the build system is via automation-build.mk:

http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/build/automation-build.mk

However, this does not suffice for test harnesses to reference the binary internal to the makefiles as the path to the binary is bizarrely quoted (e.g. dist/bin/firefox-bin is a valid path, but "dist/bin/firefox-bin" is not).  This should be remedied.  

In addition, the binary-finding logic is separate from the further intention of automation-build.mk.  If automation-build.mk is going to be included as cross-platform binary-finding logic (see bug 613804), then this functionality should be separated out to its own file and included into automation-build.mk
Blocks: 613804
Blocks: 568642
first round of the patch; try on try atm
Attachment #492828 - Flags: review?(ted.mielczarek)
Assignee: nobody → jhammel
Attachment #492828 - Flags: review?(ted.mielczarek) → review+
Landed after getting a+ from ted on irc: http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/4182651505fb
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 9 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
I would have expected to see license boilerplate; any reason for its absence?
I landed a follow-up to this to fix automation-build.mk usage from comm-central applications.

Basically the include for binary-location.mk should have used $(MOZILLA_DIR) rather than $(topsrcdir) - the way comm-central is structured means that $(topsrcdir) there is pointing to the comm-central repo, not the mozilla-central one. This was the actual patch:

http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/1b0158a0a67e
Attachment #497297 - Flags: review?(ted.mielczarek)
(In reply to comment #3)
> I would have expected to see license boilerplate; any reason for its absence?

Sorry, forgot about it; see attachment 497297 [details] [diff] [review]
Attachment #497297 - Flags: review?(ted.mielczarek)
Attachment #497297 - Flags: review+
Attachment #497297 - Flags: approval2.0+
(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > I would have expected to see license boilerplate; any reason for its absence?
> 
> Sorry, forgot about it; see attachment 497297 [details] [diff] [review]

Pushed: http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/e7d4ff8c03ad
Component: Build Config → General
Product: Firefox → Firefox Build System
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.