On Sat, 2011-09-24 at 21:06 -0400, Matt Turner wrote:
> The last discussion about using automake ("[RFC] Convert mesa to
> automake/libtool")
> ended without anything happening, probably because the branch wasn't
> ready.
>
> This patch is an attempt to get the ball rolling again. Without
> ripping out
> the entire existing build system in one swat, it attempts to gradually
> replace
> it directory by directory with automake. Some thoughts here, fresh from the oven, not analyzed: - I would start from the root makefile and work my way down, invoking the mesa makefile in the subdirs. It is intuitive, but I don't know if it is feasible. - The minimum autoconf version should be 2.60. Features above 2.60 should not be used. Starting v 2.62 there is a license controversy and some platforms x.org support cannot use anything produce with 2.62 or above. - Minimum automake is 1.10. features above 1.10 must be avoided. - Decide if mesa is ok depending on util-macros. Lots of things are taken for granted by x.org developers which won't be there in automake-mesa. There should be some useful info in: http://wiki.x.org/wiki/ModularDevelopersGuide http://wiki.x.org/wiki/NewModuleGuidelines Both are up to date. Automake has considered coexistence with custome makefile: http://www.gnu.org/software/automake/manual/automake.html#Third_002dParty-Makefiles This may help crafting a conversion strategy. Suggestion: - Do not use the pair AM_MAINTAINER_MODE and --enable-maintainer-mode in autogen.sh. They will eventually be removed in x.org. These were created by Automake as a CVS time stamp workaround. But it's a long story. it's a noop for git builds.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
