From boris at codesynthesis.com Wed Dec 5 09:07:15 2018 From: boris at codesynthesis.com (Boris Kolpackov) Date: Wed Dec 5 09:18:48 2018 Subject: [odb-users] Question about complex query implementing In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Music samal writes: > If I want to query the an A object with this name form AName_XXX which has > the biggist index, maybe it's AName_657 or other number and I want to > return this number. what should I do to implement this query I don't think you can (easily) implement this as an SQL query. But if you made the number a separate data member/column, then that would be pretty easy. Maybe even duplicate it, if it must be part of the name string. From pravorskii at meta.ua Sun Dec 30 18:30:16 2018 From: pravorskii at meta.ua (pravorskii@meta.ua) Date: Sun Dec 30 18:43:22 2018 Subject: [odb-users] Build system in ODB betas Message-ID: <1804145.nz3sQhTUAl@99d44166af322fc16a4774097a5f271d> Hi, Boris! I found that odb-2.4.0 doesn't work with the recent version of GCC (7.3.0, for example), so I decided to try latest ODB beta. I was surprised that releases and betas use different build systems. Currently, I am working on preparing packages for Debian and Gentoo with ODB libs and compiler to have the possibility of installing and managing dependencies via a system package manager. The main issue with betas during packaging is dependency on build2 toolchain. Supporting build2 by ODB is not an issue in and of itself; it is a nice tool for fast building and testing in development environments. But it does require a lot more work to integrate it with distribution build systems and checking to see if it meets the requirements of any package building guidlines. It would be great if the ODB git version would support being packaged and installed in GNU/Linux distributions via a system package manager. I have a few proposals of how it can be fixed: 1. With build2, perform only generating autotools configs from templates, and then build packages with the system autoconfig toolchain. Is that possible? 2. Add support for autotools for the ODB git version too. I'm not sure if the files for build2 and autotools will conflict with each other. 3. Crazy idea ? add cmake support. I can prepare patches if you are not against this option. Of course, these proposals should not break building ODB on other supported operating systems. Does that make sense? How I can help? Thanks. From boris at codesynthesis.com Mon Dec 31 03:02:16 2018 From: boris at codesynthesis.com (Boris Kolpackov) Date: Mon Dec 31 03:15:16 2018 Subject: [odb-users] Build system in ODB betas In-Reply-To: <1804145.nz3sQhTUAl@99d44166af322fc16a4774097a5f271d> References: <1804145.nz3sQhTUAl@99d44166af322fc16a4774097a5f271d> Message-ID: pravorskii@meta.ua writes: > 1. With build2, perform only generating autotools configs from templates, > and then build packages with the system autoconfig toolchain. Is that > possible? > > 2. Add support for autotools for the ODB git version too. I'm not sure > if the files for build2 and autotools will conflict with each other. > > 3. Crazy idea ? add cmake support. I can prepare patches if you are not > against this option. While all of these are theoretically possible (and we have done some of them in the past, like generating autotools/vcproj from templates), the main problem with all of these approaches is that we have to maintain multiple build systems with their bugs, idiosyncrasies, etc. In fact, the main motivation for starting build2 was the situation where we spent the bulk of our time maintaining all these build systems and then having lengthy threads on the mailing lists helping people investigate inevitable issues. Also keep in mind that building the ODB compiler (which is a GCC plugin) is not exactly trivial. Specifically, so far the only build systems that can build it on Windows from source is build2. So, while am sympathetic to your plight, I don't believe going back to the multi-build system arrangement is an option for us -- we just don't have the resource (nor desire, to be honest) to maintain all this mess. Also note that this is a "teething problem": once build2 is packaged for Debian, it will be pretty easy to build Debian packages with build2. In fact, there are already "unofficial" (as in, not in the Debian repository) packages for build2 if you would like to give them a try (see Other Installation Methods): https://build2.org/install.xhtml#other