Samba 4 build system - more thoughts on scons

[Jelmer Vernooij]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
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 Makefile.in
>> 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).

Cheers,

Jelmer
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDLfgBPa9Uoh7vUnYRAqXGAJ0bsGmT8wKCGnCGAegfLF+uf/Qt/ACfcqes
zz98PSP3y0pnhhDP5xFq/NI=
=xobS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----