[Mono-list] Re: [Mono-patches] mono/doc faq,1.55,1.56

[Jason Diamond]

Hi.

> +Q: How do I build corlib under Linux?
> +
> +A: You can build your own (see the web site on how to get the mcs 
> +   project from cvs), but in order to build them using mcs you need a 
> +   set of working class libraries. After building the runtime (using
> +   mono-build.sh) get them from the nightly build and put them (and
> +   mcs.exe) in your mono/install/lib directory. Then you should be able 
> +   to do: cd mcs, then: make -f makefile.gnu, then: cp mcs/mcs.exe 
> +   class/lib/*.dll ../install/lib Also, you should know that you can 
> +   either get your dose of DLLs from MonoCharge, or from 
> +   http://primates.ximian.com/~miguel/runtime. MonoCharge is updated 
> +   automatically, while the later is only updated when Miguel is around 
> +   Once you have the DLLs, you can use `make -f makefile.gnu' as described
> +   before to self-host.

mono-build.sh? I just use make and make install (I have to be root to do
the install). I'm confused by how you're copying the MonoCharge DLLs
around. Since we have mono-build.sh, could we integrate that part into
the build script by passing the name of your chosen monocharge archive
as a parameter?

> +Q: Is there a relatively straightforward way to repeat the steps taken 
> +   by Paolo to get Mono completely self-hosted on linux?
> +
> +A: To build the compiler and class libraries in Linux, run:
> +   <ul><li>make -f makefile.gnu. To install them, run: </li>
> +       <li>make -f makefile.gnu install</li>
> +       <li>You can also specify a prefix:</li>
> +       <li>make -f makefile.gnu install prefix=/opt</li>
> +   </ul>
> +   If you want to produce and distribute a monocharge tarball, run:
> +   make -f makefile.gnu dist

Should you mention that you need to be in the top level mcs directory to
do this? You also have to be root to do the install (at least on my
machine). And the makefile now requires you to specify a prefix whenever
you install.

> +Q: I am thinking about making a VS.NET solution and include as 
> +   projects both the library and the System.Xml.dll project 
> +   file: is that the best way (sure at the beginning, when the 
> +   compiler was not self hosting, you made something similar...)?
> +
> +A: Jason and Krall did check in VS.NET files that you can use 
> +   to compile our System.XML and even to run the System.XML tests 
> +   (which is way cool, and way simple).

Kral and I have been thinking (inspired by Miguel) to make a program
that can automatically generate a .sln and .csproj file for each
assembly. Would there be interest in this?

Jason