Choosing a new build system for Samba

[Volker Lendecke]

On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 06:09:40PM +1100, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> Is there any objection to the idea of moving to a new build system?
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> I'm particularly asking this question to those of my fellow team members
> who work primarily on Samba3.  Any new build system will need to be for
> the whole of Samba, or else we move backwards from our commitment to a
> combined Samba 4.0.  In particular the merged build gives a quite
> delicate dependency between Samba3 and Samba4.

For the non-merged Samba 3 server I would like to maintain
the ability to build it without python for as long as
possible. Even if it means to maintain a separate
configure.in/Makefile.in I think it is worth it. It does not
happen on a weekly basis, but I frequently go to customers
with weird platforms where it is extremely hard to even
download the samba tarfile. Being forced to download and
build python to compile Samba will make my job a lot more
difficult in many situations.

I agree that when we want to ship a full-fledged AD domain
controller we can require a more modern and complete build
and runtime environment, but for the pure 445-listener doing
CIFS it is my wish to keep the requirements as simple as
possible.

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/20100319/0f18e1ee/attachment.pgp>