[Pkg-ace-devel] x.7.6 is out

[Thomas Girard]

Hello,

(keeping the list only in To:, since we're all subscribed)

On 14/02/2010 09:05, Johnny Willemsen wrote:
>> As I said in the past, the only reasonable solution I see is moving to
>> the traditional build system. The main advantage of this is we would
>> be using the offical way to build ACE. The main disadvantage is
>> Debian/kFreeBSD and Debian/Hurd would require a different config.h and
>> platform configuration file and well, these platforms would be tested
>> a lot less than Debian/Ubuntu Linux. For Debian kFreeBSD, we'd
>> probably could get going with a mix of
>> platform_freebsd.GNU/config-frebsd.h and
>> platform_linux.GNU/config-freebsd.h. For Hurd, we would be totally on
>> our own. Have I said I know nothing about Hurd? Well, I know exactly
>> zero. I have the firm purpose of becoming a Hurd expert when it's
>> released ;-)
>>
>> Unless you have some other reason for continuing to use autotools,
>> IMHO we should relegate Debian/kFreeBSD and Debian/Hurd to a
>> second-tier status for the moment and quickly move to the traditional
>> build system for all the Debian Linux architectures. I have not tried
>> this yet (and I won't be able to test this before March) and it might
>> very well happen not to work. I seriously doubt that, though,
>> especally with Johnny here to help us with the traditional build
>> system :-)
>>
>> What do you guys think?
>
> The problem is that you are trying to package something on an OS that isn't
> tested. The only way you can stay with autoconf is that there are daily
> builds to test on debian/ubuntu with configure. I have installed an unbuntu
> 9.10 system last week, with traditional way of compilation it works without
> problems. I do have time to setup another autoconf based build, but not the
> time and experience to fix any problems with configure. Only when there is
> daily build/test, the packaging with configure will work.

The only issue I have with the traditional build system is that moving
away from autotools will not improve the autotools situation. So far no
sponsor has shown to fund this effort, so in the end if no one
volunteers the effort will remain incomplete.

We've spent a lot of time working on this with J.T. and Pau,
discovered and fixed blockers, and I believe it was worth it. But
indeed it was time consuming, and frustrating.

If we want a fresh ACE+TAO then I agree: we need the traditional,
safer, compilation method.

How about this?
  - All linux platforms switch back to the traditional method
  - Others (GNU/kFreeBSD, GNU/Hurd) stay on autotools method, even if
    they do not compile

Regards,

Thomas