proposal: merge waf build of s4 to master

tridge at tridge at
Mon Apr 5 03:19:50 MDT 2010

Hi Volker,

 > Sure. I don't see the technical requirement to rename it
 > (does waf depend on being called configure?), but if this
 > needs to be done, so be it.

It's not a technical requirement, it's just an ease of use thing. If
we are recommending the new build system as the primary system
(ie. stage 3), then I'd like the effort of learning to use it to be
minimised. By calling it configure, people who are used to the old
system will not have to know that anything has changed - their old
habits will just keep working.

It also means automated builds will work. For example, the build farm
assumes ./configure. For the waf-wip branch I setup ./configure to
point at configure.waf. 

Similarly for packaging. I'd like all the distros to be able to use
their existing spec files etc with a minimum of changes.

 > Where does the need to convert Samba3 from? Who of the
 > Samba3 developers and users have complained about the build
 > system in Samba3?

There is a strong interest among many Samba developers in moving to
have a smaller separation between Samba3 and Samba4, and to share as
much as possible. One of the things that makes that more difficult at
the moment is having a different build system for Samba3 than
Samba4. It also leads to the merged build being much more complex than
it really should be.

Once Kai has the Samba3 waf build more complete, please do take a look
at it and see what you think. 

It may be that Samba3 keeps its existing build system as the primary
build system for a long time to come. We won't really be able to judge
if a change to the primary build system for Samba3 is worthwhile until
we have a working alternative to compare to. Then we can discuss
whether we think a change is worthwhile.

Cheers, Tridge

More information about the samba-technical mailing list