Samba 4 build system - more thoughts on scons

Jelmer Vernooij jelmer at
Sun Sep 18 23:28:02 GMT 2005

Hash: SHA1

Tim Potter wrote:

> On Sun, 2005-09-18 at 13:44 +0200, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
>>> I don't think there is any value in developing a samba-specific
>>> build system. Frankly, I think we would all rather be working
>>> on Samba than on the build system. I would support requiring
>>> scons or GNU Make, but I don't see the point in simply
>>> rewriting what we have today in python (is that what you are
>>> suggesting here?).
>> No, we'd just be using scons, but there would be the 'fallback' a
>> script that can generate a configure script and
>> using the existing scons build files. This would only be there
>> for people that don't need to change to config but just pull down
>> the tarball and run ./configure && make.
> It will be hard and annoying to maintain two build systems at once,
> although the build farm would help out finding breakages. I might
> try and get a demo in a branch going just so people can try it out.
Well, it'd be only one system we have to maintain ourselves as the
current scons is already maintained for us (and we would use the same
SConstruct / SConscript files for both systems).


Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)


More information about the samba-technical mailing list