Re: [Mesa-dev] mesademos build system: would one be enough?
On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Jose Fonseca jfons...@vmware.com wrote: Johannes Obermayr's recent patch series remind me of one thing I've been planning to ask here for quite some time: Would anybody oppose dropping automake build system in mesademos for just cmake ? On Mesa there is rationale behind the two different build systems (automake and scons), but for mesademos, there's nothing that automake can do that can't be made with cmake; both generate makefiles giving a similar experience to Linux/Unix developers; cmake is already exclusively used in piglit, so there's substantial expertise/familiarity on mesa developers community already; and cmake has the advantage over automake of supporting native Windows/MSVC builds. So I really don't think there's any need for automake on mesademos anymore. I know mesademo's cmake build system does not yet build some apps/demos, but this is some thing that I could easily and gladly fix if we agreed on deprecating automake over cmake on mesademos. I've no real objections to it but the big difference between piglit and mesa-demos is that distros package mesa-demos, nobody packages piglit really and there is little reason to. so dropping automake means all the downstream consumers have to redo their packaging to use cmake which can be a bit painful. Though I'm sure fedora has lots of simple cmake things to steal packaging info from. Dave. ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] mesademos build system: would one be enough?
- Original Message - On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Jose Fonseca jfons...@vmware.com wrote: Johannes Obermayr's recent patch series remind me of one thing I've been planning to ask here for quite some time: Would anybody oppose dropping automake build system in mesademos for just cmake ? On Mesa there is rationale behind the two different build systems (automake and scons), but for mesademos, there's nothing that automake can do that can't be made with cmake; both generate makefiles giving a similar experience to Linux/Unix developers; cmake is already exclusively used in piglit, so there's substantial expertise/familiarity on mesa developers community already; and cmake has the advantage over automake of supporting native Windows/MSVC builds. So I really don't think there's any need for automake on mesademos anymore. I know mesademo's cmake build system does not yet build some apps/demos, but this is some thing that I could easily and gladly fix if we agreed on deprecating automake over cmake on mesademos. I've no real objections to it but the big difference between piglit and mesa-demos is that distros package mesa-demos, nobody packages piglit really and there is little reason to. so dropping automake means all the downstream consumers have to redo their packaging to use cmake which can be a bit painful. Though I'm sure fedora has lots of simple cmake things to steal packaging info from. Thanks. Yes, I agree the needs of linux distribution packagers would have to be address too. But my impression is also that cmake is not particularly quirky or hard to package provided minimal care is taken. And some of Johannes Obermayr's patches seem to address some this. BTW, I think there was some interest in getting piglit to install as normal packages do. The use case, at least for me, is to allow piglit to be built on a build machine, and then tested on a separate test cluster (avoiding the need to build piglit on every node, or share the whole source tree with NFS). But actually packging seems unnecessary to me as well, given the rate at which tests are being added to piglit. Jose ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] mesademos build system: would one be enough?
On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 03:17:03 -0800 (PST), Jose Fonseca jfons...@vmware.com wrote: Johannes Obermayr's recent patch series remind me of one thing I've been planning to ask here for quite some time: Would anybody oppose dropping automake build system in mesademos for just cmake ? cmake is the worst Linux build system I think I've ever encountered, including automake and the various custom garbage I've seen in software I've packaged. Its ability to make a modern CPU look slow is stunning. That said, I don't care to maintain mesa-demos (it's why I wanted it cut out of Mesa core), so I don't really have a say here. pgpF69kmt2GKC.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] mesademos build system: would one be enough?
On 11/21/2011 05:07 AM, Jose Fonseca wrote: - Original Message - On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Jose Fonsecajfons...@vmware.com wrote: Johannes Obermayr's recent patch series remind me of one thing I've been planning to ask here for quite some time: Would anybody oppose dropping automake build system in mesademos for just cmake ? On Mesa there is rationale behind the two different build systems (automake and scons), but for mesademos, there's nothing that automake can do that can't be made with cmake; both generate makefiles giving a similar experience to Linux/Unix developers; cmake is already exclusively used in piglit, so there's substantial expertise/familiarity on mesa developers community already; and cmake has the advantage over automake of supporting native Windows/MSVC builds. So I really don't think there's any need for automake on mesademos anymore. I know mesademo's cmake build system does not yet build some apps/demos, but this is some thing that I could easily and gladly fix if we agreed on deprecating automake over cmake on mesademos. I've no real objections to it but the big difference between piglit and mesa-demos is that distros package mesa-demos, nobody packages piglit really and there is little reason to. so dropping automake means all the downstream consumers have to redo their packaging to use cmake which can be a bit painful. Though I'm sure fedora has lots of simple cmake things to steal packaging info from. Thanks. Yes, I agree the needs of linux distribution packagers would have to be address too. But my impression is also that cmake is not particularly quirky or hard to package provided minimal care is taken. And some of Johannes Obermayr's patches seem to address some this. BTW, I think there was some interest in getting piglit to install as normal packages do. The use case, at least for me, is to allow piglit to be built on a build machine, and then tested on a separate test cluster (avoiding the need to build piglit on every node, or share the whole source tree with NFS). But actually packging seems unnecessary to me as well, given the rate at which tests are being added to piglit. FWIW, I'm not a big fan of cmake either, but I'm OK with switching to that as the one build system for demos. -Brian ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] mesademos build system: would one be enough?
On 11/21/2011 09:40 AM, Eric Anholt wrote: On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 03:17:03 -0800 (PST), Jose Fonsecajfons...@vmware.com wrote: Johannes Obermayr's recent patch series remind me of one thing I've been planning to ask here for quite some time: Would anybody oppose dropping automake build system in mesademos for just cmake ? cmake is the worst Linux build system I think I've ever encountered, including automake and the various custom garbage I've seen in software I've packaged. Its ability to make a modern CPU look slow is stunning. That said, I don't care to maintain mesa-demos (it's why I wanted it cut out of Mesa core), so I don't really have a say here. It's a good kernel fork-bomb test. :) ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] mesademos build system: would one be enough?
On 11/21/2011 09:40 AM, Eric Anholt wrote: On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 03:17:03 -0800 (PST), Jose Fonseca jfons...@vmware.com wrote: Johannes Obermayr's recent patch series remind me of one thing I've been planning to ask here for quite some time: Would anybody oppose dropping automake build system in mesademos for just cmake ? cmake is the worst Linux build system I think I've ever encountered, including automake and the various custom garbage I've seen in software I've packaged. Its ability to make a modern CPU look slow is stunning. That said, I don't care to maintain mesa-demos (it's why I wanted it cut out of Mesa core), so I don't really have a say here. In piglit, the thing that's really irritating about CMake is the fact that if I simply type 'make', it slowly enumerates every single one of the tests instead of just updating the one or two targets I've changed. With automake, if nothing needs updating, it returns almost immediately and says Nothing to be done. cmake is incredibly slow. That said, I vastly prefer only having one build system, so if it has to be CMake, then...that's fine. Much better than having two. Presumably the reason for picking CMake over Automake is that it's easier to use on Windows? ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] mesademos build system: would one be enough?
- Original Message - On 11/21/2011 09:40 AM, Eric Anholt wrote: On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 03:17:03 -0800 (PST), Jose Fonseca jfons...@vmware.com wrote: Johannes Obermayr's recent patch series remind me of one thing I've been planning to ask here for quite some time: Would anybody oppose dropping automake build system in mesademos for just cmake ? cmake is the worst Linux build system I think I've ever encountered, including automake and the various custom garbage I've seen in software I've packaged. Its ability to make a modern CPU look slow is stunning. That said, I don't care to maintain mesa-demos (it's why I wanted it cut out of Mesa core), so I don't really have a say here. In piglit, the thing that's really irritating about CMake is the fact that if I simply type 'make', it slowly enumerates every single one of the tests instead of just updating the one or two targets I've changed. With automake, if nothing needs updating, it returns almost immediately and says Nothing to be done. cmake is incredibly slow. That said, I vastly prefer only having one build system, so if it has to be CMake, then...that's fine. Much better than having two. Presumably the reason for picking CMake over Automake is that it's easier to use on Windows? Correct. The only mean to use automake on windows is through cygwin/msys, and it's probably limited to Cygwin/MinGW gnu compiler only. I don't think it's possible to use Microsoft compiler with automake at all. Jose ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] mesademos build system: would one be enough?
- Original Message - On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 03:17:03 -0800 (PST), Jose Fonseca jfons...@vmware.com wrote: Johannes Obermayr's recent patch series remind me of one thing I've been planning to ask here for quite some time: Would anybody oppose dropping automake build system in mesademos for just cmake ? cmake is the worst Linux build system I think I've ever encountered, including automake and the various custom garbage I've seen in software I've packaged. Its ability to make a modern CPU look slow is stunning. This is a surprise. You're right that execution time on Linux is slower than the average recursive make build system, which is not fast very fast to start with. I never pay much attention to it, maybe because I typically only build a single dir or executable when doing frequent recompiles. But otherwise cmake fares quite alright in my book: out of the box support for pkg-config, cross compiliation, easy to automate. I've been using it successfully in many projects. Is there any build system you particularly recommend? Jose ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
