status of the s4 waf build - go to stage 3?

[Andrew Bartlett]

On Fri, 2010-04-23 at 13:37 +0200, Stefan (metze) Metzmacher wrote:
> Andrew Bartlett schrieb:
> > On Fri, 2010-04-23 at 12:59 +0200, Stefan (metze) Metzmacher wrote:
> >> Hi Tridge,
> >>
> >>> Most developers building s4 now seem to have switched to the waf
> >>> build and everyone seems to be pretty happy with it.
> >>>
> >>> At this stage it may make sense to go to "stage 3" for use of waf in
> >>> Samba4 (as per the original proposal). That would mean:
> >> We still have a few missing features, we need to fix.
> > 
> > Which features are those?  As far as I can tell, every Samba4 developer
> > is already using the waf build, and the old one is rotting fast.  What
> > is gained by holding up the change?  
> 
> The most important for me are:
> 
> - missing yacc, lex rules (with the same strict check as in the autoconf
>   build)

I don't know exactly what's involved, but this seems reasonable.  But as
I'm the only one who ever updates yacc and lex files (via imports from
Heimdal), is it urgent?

> - waf build should (by default )give an error if a reconfigure.
>   optional auto reconfigure isn't strictly needed.
>   If we don't add that, developers could get to a stage (after a git
>   pull) where the 'waf build' and 'make' will just display a very
>   confusing error, which they don't now how to handle without a
>   git clean -x -d -f or waf distclean (I guess waf clean would not
>   help).

Given the complete disasters the current build can get into, are we not
looking for perfection in the replacement?  

> > I would like to make a new alpha with the waf build soon, so we need to
> > change the default as soon as possible. 
> > 
> >> Yes, we should maintain both for a while.
> > 
> > Why?  (Particularly if we have decided to abandon the merged build in
> > the short term). 
> 
> I think we need to at least maintain it until waf has fixed the missing
> features.

I'm happy to leave it in, but I worry about the maintenance cost. 

Andrew Bartlett

-- 
Andrew Bartlett                                http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team           http://samba.org
Samba Developer, Cisco Inc.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 190 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/samba-technical/attachments/20100423/db984ce4/attachment.pgp>