[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gentoo-dev
Subject:    Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: moving OpenRC to a meson-based build
From:       William Hubbs <williamh () gentoo ! org>
Date:       2017-02-01 15:39:34
Message-ID: 20170201153934.GC14671 () linux1
[Download RAW message or body]


On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 01:37:04AM +0000, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 02:04:06PM -0600, William Hubbs wrote:
> > As I said on the bug, the downside is the addition of py3 and ninja as
> > build time dependencies, but I think the upside (a build system where
> > we don't have to worry about parallel make issues or portability)
> > outweighs that.
> Could you please link or otherwise explain the portability issue?

I'm not talking about a specific instance, just the flexability you get
with a build system. You let it handle the details of building
executables, linking libraries, etc.

I have heard from more than one person that the OpenRC makefiles are
not written well, and I agree, so I've been looking for a build system
for a while.

I thought about autotools. I'm not really fond of its syntax, and I've
been told that, to use autotools correctly, I would need to start
generating manual release tarballs again because I would need to put the
autotools generated cruft in them.

I'm open to suggestions. I picked meson to experiment with because it
has a very nice clean syntax.

William


["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]