More poking around... Remember, I don't really grok waf. The call to write_config_header has a suspicious looking argument. So I tried it. - ctx.write_config_header("config.h", remove=False) + ctx.write_config_header("config.h", remove=True)
config.h looks reasonable. waf -v is much less cluttered. Any reason I shouldn't commit if it survives serious testing? It survives waf configure and build, but my normal build script (with various options) gets warnings from libntp/timespecops.c which doesn't include config.h ?? I haven't figured out how the simple case builds without warnings. ---------- There are still a a few python symbols I don't understand. [82/95] Compiling ntpd/ntpd.c 13:24:10 ^[[35mrunner^[[0m ['/usr/lib64/ccache/gcc', '-fstack-protector-all', '-Wshadow', '-Wpacked', '-Wcast-qual', '-Wmissing-declarations', '-Wdisabled-optimization', '-Wimplicit-function-declaration', '-Winvalid-pch', '-Wpointer-arith', '-Wwrite-strings', '-Winit-self', '-Wfloat-equal', '-Wformat', '-Wformat-signedness', '-Wformat-security', '-Wsuggest-attribute=noreturn', '-fPIC', '-O1', '-Wall', '-Wextra', '-Wmissing-prototypes', '-Wstrict-prototypes', '-Wundef', '-Wunused', '-std=c99', '-D_GNU_SOURCE', '-I../host/ntpd', '-I../../ntpd', '-I..', '-I../../include', '-DPYTHONDIR="/usr/local/lib/python2.7/site-packages"', '-DPYTHONARCHDIR="/usr/local/lib64/python2.7/site-packages"', '-DHAVE_PYEXT=1', '-DHAVE_PYTHON_H=1', '../../ntpd/ntpd.c', '-c', '-o/home/murray/ntpsec/play/build/main/ntpd/ntpd.c.3.o'] -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@ntpsec.org http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel