Choosing a new build system for Samba

[Jelmer Vernooij]

On Fri, 2010-03-19 at 14:04 -0400, yaberger at ca.ibm.com wrote: 
> Volker Lendecke wrote:
> < 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 would *really* appreciate to be able to build samba without having to 
> maintain a python package on my AIX systems.
What about Python makes it problem? Would CMake be less of a problem in
that regard ? Or would you rather we stick with autoconf ? 

Cheers,

Jelmer
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/samba-technical/attachments/20100320/e82a8e63/attachment.pgp>