proposal: merge waf build of s4 to master

Volker Lendecke Volker.Lendecke at SerNet.DE
Mon Apr 5 05:15:56 MDT 2010

On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 09:09:41PM +1000, tridge at wrote:
>  > Another question: What does the pure Samba3 end-user doing a
>  > compile gain from a conversion to waf?
> Not nearly as much as developers gain, but there are a few things:
>  - install/uninstall work properly (ie. really removes all files and
>    directories on uninstall)
>  - correct use of system vs in-tree headers, so less likely to get a
>    broken build

I would call these ones bugs in the current
Can you please file bugs about it in, so
that they are not forgotten?

>  - bundled library renames, so they can safely install on a system
>    that has packages that rely on talloc, tdb etc without breaking
>    their system

What does that mean?

>  - able to use rpath if they want to, to avoid having to muck about
>    with their

What blocks us from putting that into as well?

>  - if they are installing from git, then they can update and re-build
>    reliably without having to do make clean idl_full

Ok, I was asking about end-users downloading a .tar.gz from

>  - detection of conflicts between system and in-tree libs, so you
>    don't end up with two instances of talloc in one binary (and thus
>    possible corruption)

Again, this is a bug in the

> and most importantly of all, a bit of colour in their terminal when
> building :-)


> Perhaps none of these are enough by themselves to justify a change of
> build system for Samba3, but I think the gains for the developers will
> be more worthwhile.

Sure, but I would guess the ratio of developers versus users
differs a bit between Samba3 and Samba4.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <>

More information about the samba-technical mailing list