NASM has been unused for ages (rP9891) and we still have legacy code lines in our premake scripts. We also carry an unused binary for Windows.
Details
- Reviewers
• leper - Commits
- rP19188: Cleanup of NASM. It has been unused for ages (r9891) and we still have legacy…
- Trac Tickets
- #3729
Check there are no side effects on premake.
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rP 0 A.D. Public Repository
- Lint
Automatic diff as part of commit; lint not applicable. - Unit
Automatic diff as part of commit; unit tests not applicable.
Event Timeline
There are still remnants of the nasm support left in the following files (added in r9829, and possibly untouched during the premake updates (apart from creating a diff of the customizations and applying that on top of the new code)):
build/premake/premake4/src/actions/vstudio/vs2010_vcxproxj.lua
build/premake/premake4/src/actions/make/make_cpp.lua
build/premake/premake4/src/actions/vstudio/_vstudio.lua
build/premake/premake4/src/base/api.lua
Afterwards you should regenerate the following file:
build/premake/premake4/src/host/scripts.c
Apart from that it does build fine (which is what everyone would suspect given that we don't use it anywhere).
Build is green
Updating workspaces. Build (release)... Build (debug)... Running debug tests... Running cxxtest tests (302 tests)..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................OK!
http://jw:8080/job/phabricator/250/ for more details.
Ah yes I know, I thought it was not really useful to spend time un-patching premake4 since we will never make it match upstream but we will move to premake5 (not patched this time) instead.
I don't see any benefit in removing the functionality we added in premake4, it's not even a hack. Do you have strong feelings on the matter?
Do you have strong feelings on the matter?
It would seem to be more complete, but not really.