proposal: merge waf build of s4 to master

[Volker Lendecke]

On Tue, Apr 06, 2010 at 07:41:29PM +1000, tridge at samba.org wrote:
>  > For me LD_LIBRARY_PATH has worked fine so far.
> 
> Given the problems you are concerned about with getting the wrong
> library with a binary, I suspect that LD_LIBRARY_PATH hasn't actually
> worked out that well for you. It is pretty much impossible to get a
> LD_LIBRARY_PATH or ld.so.conf setting that is correct for all the
> different situations that developers run into. If you get it right for
> one binary, and you then run another one (eg. ldapsearch) then you end
> up stuck with the wrong library again.
> 
> That is why rpath saves a lot of headaches. Still you can instead use
> the methods I described in my previous email to switch off all the
> shared libs if you would prefer that.

What blocks us from putting rpath capabilities into the
autoconf based system in Samba3?

>  > To be honest, so far I have not been convinced to throw away
>  > the old system in favor of something that will bring its own
>  > set of problems.
> 
> I think it is a bit premature to judge whether waf is the right choice
> for s3, as you can't yet try it out. Once it works I'd encourage you
> to give it a try, and then comment from real experience.

I would be fine and willing to give anything a try that does
not introduce another dependency, in this case python. If
you still have any questions why I dislike this additional
dependency, please aks!

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/20100406/4fc6f1d6/attachment.pgp>