I have a Bazel project with a WORKSPACE and many packages. WORKSPACE file is quite huge, so I wonder if it's possible to break it down in separated files and import them.
You can extract parts of the WORKSPACE into .bzl files, and load() these symbols for variables and functions into the WORKSPACE.
load("//foo/bar:file.bzl", "function_for_workspace")
function_for_workspace()
See Loading an extension for more information.
Related
I have a .bzl file in the same directory as WORKSPACE. This .bzl file is loaded by the WORKSPACE and one other file in the source tree.
bazel query --universe_scope=//... --order_output=no 'rbuildfiles(variables.bzl)'
prints the paths of the two files I would expect, but also references to about 200 other files which are all external dependencies and cannot possibly depend on variables.bzl
for example:
#pypi__futures_3_2_0//:BUILD
#pypi__grpcio_1_14_1//:BUILD
#eigen//:BUILD.bazel
#io_bazel_rules_go//go/private:BUILD.bazel
Assuming I am doing something incorrectly and that this is not a bug. Any expertise would be greatly appreciated. How can I use rbuilddeps to return /only/ the files which load variables.bzl?
The WORKSPACE file of the main repo can arbitrarily affect external repositories. So, rbuildfiles is showing you because changes to variables.bzl could in fact affect all those external BUILD files indirectly through WORKSPACE.
If you don't actually want to see the BUILD files in external repositories, you could intersect the result of rbuildfiles with //....
I am aware that bazel accepts both BUILD and BUILD.bazel as valid filenames.
The android tools seem to also have a BUILD.tools file.
In general, does bazel have any restrictions for a BUILD file's extension? For example, could i have BUILD.generated to delineate generate BUILD files from non-generated BUILD files?
The .tools extension is part of building Bazel itself. From the perspective of Bazel, it's just any ordinary file. It gets picked up here: https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel/blob/bbc8ed16aee07c3ba9321d58aa4c0ffc55fa2ba9/tools/android/BUILD#L197
then eventually gets processed here: https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel/blob/c816b89a2224c3c318f1228755ef41c53975f45c/src/create_embedded_tools.py#L74
For the use case you mention, one way to go about it is to generate a .bzl file with a meaningful name that contains a macro that you can call from a BUILD or BUILD.bazel file. That way you can separate the generated rules from manually maintained rules. This is similar to how generate_workspace works: https://docs.bazel.build/versions/master/generate-workspace.html
I'm writing a post-build tool that needs the location of a list of target's jar files.
For these locations I have an aspect that runs on a list of targets (separately for each target using --aspects) and fetch the jar file path for each of them.
I've managed to get each jar file path in a custom output file (e.g. jar.txt) in each target's output folder.
But this will mean I would need to go over each jar.txt file separately to get the location.
Is there a way to accumulate the jar files paths in a single file?
Something like:
Try and write to the same output folder with append command in the aspect. I'm not sure if a shared output folder is possible.
Create a synthetic target which depends on all the relevant targets, then run an aspect on this target and accumulate the jars and only write them at the root after the recursion is back.
Are 1. or 2. valid options?
What is the recommended strategy to accumulate data in bazel aspects output files?
Bazel doesn't provide facitlities in Skylark for accumulating information between targets that are not related to each other in the target graph (e.g. ones that are mentioned on the command line next to each other).
One possibility would be to write a Skylark rule that depends on all the targets you usually mention on the command line and built that one; that rule will be able to collate the classpaths from each Java target to a single file.
Another possibility is to tell Bazel to write build events (that includes all the outputs of all targets the specified build pattern expands to) to a file using the --experimental_build_event_{json,text,binary}_file. (The "experimental" will be removed soon.). The files contain instances of this message:
https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel/blob/master/src/main/java/com/google/devtools/build/lib/buildeventstream/proto/build_event_stream.proto
Natan,
If I understand correctly, you want to transitively propagate the information from each aspect node out into a single result. To do this, build the transitive set in your aspect rule implementation and pass it via the "provider" mechanism [^1]. I wrote up some examples on bazel aspects, perhaps you'll find it useful[^2].
https://github.com/pcj/bazel_aspects/blob/master/aspects.bzl#L94-L104
https://github.com/pcj/bazel_aspects
I'm want to compile meshlab(http://sourceforge.net/p/meshlab/code/HEAD/tree/) and put the generated file outside the source directory to keep the source clean. Is it possible to just specify a build directory as the way in cmake?
The answer in this post Qmake and Make using separate folders for sources and headers, requires to modify the .pro file and doesn't work in my case. Users may want to specify the build dir path as they like, right?
I think what are trying to do is a QMake Shadow Build. This question about Manually Configuring Shadow Builds in QMake should help you.
When compiling latex documents the compiler emits a lot of "object" files. This clutters the directories I'm working on and it difficults the use of VCS like SVN. When I work with C++ code I have separate directories for the code and the objects, I can run make on the source directory but the .o files go to the build directory.
Is there a proper way to perform this separate compilation with Latex documents? Can it be done by using Makefiles or by passing options to the latex compiler?
Thanks
You can use:
pdflatex --output-directory=tmp file.tex
and all the files will be stored in the folder tmp (pdf included).
Because this is not an optimal solution, I made my own tool, pydflatex, that compiles the LaTeX source by stashing away the auxilliary files (using the trick above), and brings the pdf back to the current directory, so after compiling you only have file.tex and file.pdf in your directory. This plays very well with version control.
I can't help much with LaTeX (having last user it seriously 20 years ago;-), but for Subversion, you should read up on the svn:ignore property -- it makes it easy to ignore files with extensions you do not want to version (object files, bytecode files as Python can often put in the same directory as the sources, backup files some text editors use, &c).
Latex generates the temporary files in the directory where the main document is located. If you want the contents to be placed in a different location, try with a main file like below.
\documentclass{article}
\input{src/maindocument.tex}
Using this method, you could maintain a directory structure like below
/
main.tex
/src
maindocument.tex
Two options, besides the above.
Use Lyx: it looks after the separate files. I think it copies the Latex file over to its own private directory and runs latex on it. In any case, nothing is created in the current directory.
Use a makefile or one of the special Latex make programs, and have your regular targets run make clean.