proposal: merge waf build of s4 to master

[Volker Lendecke]

On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 09:41:36PM +1000, tridge at samba.org wrote:
>  > Just don't build tdb as a shared library. If the system one
>  > does not fit your needs, link it statically.
> 
> yes, we can just do that for tdb. It does mean fatter binaries, but it
> does work.
> 
> For s4 the 'fat binaries' was getting a bit silly though. We produced
> 1.1G of binaries and people were starting to complain. Just the time
> to write them all to disk when you change one C file and run 'make'
> was getting huge. I know one Samba developer who bought a SSD to avoid
> the problem, and I added source4/scripting/devel/tmpfs.sh as another
> workaround (if you have enough system memory!).
> 
> We ended up with more than 10x larger binaries than we should have.

I don't mind Samba4 to require python.

>  > That's scary. How many libtdb-foobar.so will we end up with?
>  > This is just a debugging nightmare.
> 
> why is it harder to debug? gdb knows about the libs fine. 

Multiple builds with history. libtdb-samba4.so being rebuilt
with new tdb, old binaries still hanging around linking
against the old one. Or will you include the git hash of the
build in the library name?

Volker
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/samba-technical/attachments/20100405/84119ad5/attachment.pgp>