In order to better evaluate the current position of developers with respect to autotools versions, is there a way we can do an informal poll to see how many people are still using automake 1.11 or 1.12? If it's only a small number of people, we can try to find an upgrade path for their system/distro to upgrade automake. Is this a reasonable things to do/ask for?
Kapil On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 4:24 PM, James Peach <jor...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Jun 25, 2015, at 11:01 PM, Kapil Arya <ka...@mesosphere.io> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 1:38 AM, Benjamin Mahler < > benjamin.mah...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> Taking a step back, it looks like the patches in MESOS-2273 approached > the > >> problem assuming 1.13. Have you re-considered how you might approach it > if > >> you didn't have 1.13? Or is this 1.13 macro the only solution? > >> > > > > Hmm, I went back to take another quick look at the situation and here is > my > > conclusion. The automake recursive targets makes the life somewhat easier > > (and make the code less hackish) by taking care of recursive invocation > of > > the "tests" target for the subdirs. If we didn't have this new macro, the > > approach would have been to add a "tests" target by hand to the > appropriate > > Makefile.am files (top-level, src/, 3rdparty/, and 3rdparty/libprocess). > > This is what we have been doing for stuff like "maven-install" and > "bench" > > targets. So, if we were to go for the upgrade path, we might consider > > rewriting some of these existing targets as well. > > Maybe I'm jumping in the middle without the full context, but why don't > you just always build the tests? The way I have done this in other project > is to always build the tests with noinst_ automake variables. Them "make > check" will just depend on tests that are already built. > > You can then add a --enable-test-suite option to configure to cause the > tests to be installed. This would be pretty useful since you could easily > build a mesos-tests package for a CI pipeline. > > >> Worth noting that users can already build the tests without running > them by > >> specifying GTEST_FILTER="", so is the upgrade pain worth it? With gcc > 4.8, > >> we had a lot of benefits motivating us :) > >> > > > > I do partially agree with you in that with gcc 4.8 we had huge benefits > > compared to what we get with automake 1.13. > > Note that requiring gcc 4.8 affects everyone who build Mesos. Requiring > more recent autotools mainly affects developers since autotools is not > required for building from official source releases. > > J
