On 12. 05. 2013 13:36, Maarten Brock wrote:
> > But your script has quite some differences.
> > - I used the osx snapshot without i386
>   I don't know what do you mean with "without i386" but Erik already
> explained the situation. The OS X release builds were based on PPC
> snapshots.

I meant the snapshot named
instead of the one use in the script
which has 'i386' in its name.

I see, you used the ppc snapshot, which I prefer. The script uses the i386 snapshot probably because ppc snapshot was not available in the time when the 2.2.0 release was done.

> > - I did not remove sdcc/include and sdcc/lib
> They don't include anything useful sor SDCC, so they should be removed.
> > - I did not rename the sdcc directories
> > - I did not repack the src
> > - I did not copy Changelog and README for windows
> > - And why is the doumentation part disabled for windows?
> ??? It is not, see "unzip ../dl/sdcc-doc-${date}-${revision}.zip" in
> function repack_win().

But it's (was) inside 'if false'

Yes, it was, now it is not any more.

> > - And why is most PRocessing # commented out?
> In the script I sent you has several things commented out or disabled. I
> attached the corrected version, but I didn't test it!
> > I am confused.
> I hope that my answers decreased your confusion ;-)
> > Furthermore would it not be wise to put this script in subversion
> > (e.g. sdcc/support/scripts)?
> Probably yes: I was the only one who used it until now.
> Actually I forgot that it is already there!

I should have noticed that. I feel stupid.

Me too ;-)

Anyway, I'm testing the script and adapting it to include the x64 windows version now. I expect an RC3 to come out soon.


There's one more thing: can we still create a known_bugs.html file from the new system?

Yes, I updated the generating script. The knownbugs.html file is included in doc snapshot packages and it is automatically included in the release (candidate) package by the script.