Em 5/3/2011 04:04, Sean Breheny escreveu:
> I want to second BillW's suggestion. A few years ago I had a situation
> where a vendor had written code for us and given us the source, but
> when we needed to build it, he couldn't remember exactly which version
> of the toolchain he used (this was VHDL). There was a bug where it
> would only function properly when compiled with exactly a certain
> toolset - some optimization difference on other versions was breaking
> something in the logic. Of course, this meant that something was
> structured in a very fragile way and needed to be fixed, but it would
> have helped immensely to be able to at least replicate the binary file
> from the source to make sure that we were indeed starting with the
> correct source. To make matters worse, the toolset downloaded periodic
> updates and its exact state could not be captured by a single version
> number. You had to also know the version numbers of all the
> subcomponents. It would have been so much better if a history of all
> of the upgrades which were applied was kept, which could have been
> done easily because each update was a self-extracting file which had
> to be manually run. These files could have been checked in along with
> the source to keep source+binaries+toolset versioned.
>
> Sean


Bill snipped out a paragraph where I explain that I keep copies of the
installers of the building tools and also keep notes on the source code
of what building tools and versions were used.

Isaac

--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.