PROPOSAL: Use Cmake as the build system for Samba
idra at samba.org
Thu Feb 18 17:37:36 MST 2010
On Fri, 2010-02-19 at 01:29 +0100, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-02-18 at 17:02 -0500, simo wrote:
> > On Fri, 2010-02-19 at 08:50 +1100, tridge at samba.org wrote:
> > > Hi Simo,
> > >
> > > > As you say it is nothing that we haven't done or keep doing, but
> > > > certainly if I should judge on this criteria I'd definitely choose CMake
> > > > over python any day.
> > >
> > > It is not cmake or python. It is cmake _and_ python. By using cmake we
> > > don't lose the need for python in samba4.
> > >
> > > Having a dependence on one external tool doesn't justify adding
> > > another. The point of using a python based build tool is that it adds
> > > no additional pain.
> > For samba3 it is a choice between cmake or python afaik.
> The python we rely on in Samba (2.4) was released in 2004. All it
> requires to build is a C compiler and libc. SCons and waf both support
> Python 2.4 and higher.
> CMake requires C++ and the CMake that Andreas' current work is based on
> was released in 2008.
> Why is Python more pain ?
I don't see were anyone said anything about more pain.
Although I have to note that RHEL3 and RHEL4 are already cut out if 2.4
is the minimum version. Of course they are cut out as well with CMake,
so that really isn't a point.
Samba Team GPL Compliance Officer <simo at samba.org>
Principal Software Engineer at Red Hat, Inc. <simo at redhat.com>
More information about the samba-technical