WAF 2.x upgrade status

[Alexander Bokovoy]

On ke, 04 heinä 2018, Amitay Isaacs wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 9:10 PM, Alexander Bokovoy via samba-technical
> <samba-technical at lists.samba.org> wrote:
> > On to, 28 kesä 2018, Alexander Bokovoy via samba-technical wrote:
> >> On to, 28 kesä 2018, Noel Power via samba-technical wrote:
> >> > Hi Alexander
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On 27/06/18 19:29, Andrew Bartlett via samba-technical wrote:
> >> > > On Wed, 2018-06-27 at 18:14 +0300, Alexander Bokovoy via samba-
> >> > > technical wrote:
> >> > >> Hi,
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Since February I am working on and off on migrating to a newer WAF
> >> > >> version. We want to use WAF 2.x as it is compatible with Python 3.
> >> > >> Over years WAF also evolved and most of infrastructure Samba was
> >> > >> building upon since WAF 1.5 times got deprecated.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Below is a progress I have to date.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Following gitlab branch contains the current state:
> >> > >> https://gitlab.com/samba-team/devel/samba/commits/abbra-py3-master-waf
> >> > >>
> >> > >> I migrated from WAF 1.8 to 1.9 to 2.0 to 2.0.4 and finally to 2.0.8.
> >> > >> Autobuild still fails but the code passes configure, builds, and in some
> >> > >> targets even 'make test'.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Thanks to Thomas Nagy help, I've got past the issue I was banging my
> >> > >> head against for long: building Heimdal compilers (asn1_compile and
> >> > >> compile_et).
> >> > >>
> >> > >> What's not working:  anything that require newly built python bindings
> >> > >> in 'make test'. For example, tests fail somehow to find ldb bindings
> >> > >> that were built just now. I'll look at this tomorrow.
> >> > does it work on a second make test issue ? I have seen sometimes in the
> >> > normal build make test does not pick up ldb until the second make test.
> >> > Unfortunately I don't know what triggers this.
> >> There seem to be some issue with PYTHONPATH, not sure why. A cannot have
> >> a second run over the same code in a CI. ;)
> >>
> >> Locally I tried to play with the variables unsuccessfully so far.
> > Got this fixed by reverting 5bdbe1ac62b334a2890bf3e5a9ca6e47bb371048
> > partially. There are, of course, more subtle issues, see below.
> >
> >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >> https://gitlab.com/samba-team/devel/samba/pipelines/24684552 is a latest
> >> > >> run -- we pass roughly 1/3 of all build jobs.
> >> > > Thank you so much Alexander for your patience and effort in this area!
> >> > That's super news, sounds really promising. Unfortunately I am on
> >> > vacation for 2 weeks from Wed next week (and tomorrow also) so not sure
> >> > if I will get a chance to try this out before I return.
> >> No problem. Andreas wants me to get this done before first 4.9 RC
> >> anyway, so I need to get full autobuild working during first week of
> >> July.
> > I'm now at the point where only two build jobs are failing out of 15:
> >
> >  - ctdb tests aren't finding cmdline_test binary. Existing code in 'waf
> >    autotest' in ctdb/wscript attempts to use in-source test script
> >    instead of a generated one that uses proper path
> 
> The tests are supposed to run from the source tree.  So it must use
> the in-tree test script.  Can't think of why that should break with
> the change in waf.  Unless waf 2.0 uses paths for scripts relative to
> bin/default instead of the source dir.
> 
> Will take a look at it tomorrow.
I fixed this by properly promoting a build environment.
So far I have all but one or two tests passing. Those two tests are
different for Gitlab runner and my local autobuild run though. See
my response to Andrew in this thread.



-- 
/ Alexander Bokovoy