Re: [vpp-dev] meson build?
Indeed, it is time to take a break from redoing the build system - regardless of what is best, it has been through a lot of changes and come a long way. Taking a break from changing build systems, one can have time to pursue one of my favorite related things -- IWYU from Google -- https://include-what-you-use.org/ -- okay, I will now continue my reading of *How To Gain Friends and Influence People*, chuckle! [I had once come up with some tricks to make IWYU less painful to use for VPP; I'd have to find it, if possible, if anyone was interested.] Burt On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 5:51 PM Damjan Marion via Lists.Fd.Io wrote: > > > > On 15 Oct 2018, at 21:42, Stephen Hemminger > wrote: > > > > Has VPP ever considered using Meson, which seems to be where most > userspace > > projects are headed for build systems. > > > > http://mesonbuild.com/Comparisons.html > > Before I went into cmake direction, i spent significant amount of time > looking into meson. > Actually I come to the point where I am able to build vpp with meson > generated ninja files. > I thought, if we are changing let's change to something modern but after > spending time on it > i was not convinced it is right way to go. Beside the personal animosity > towards python based > tools installed trough pip, i was not able to find quick and obvious way > to do some "special things" we need > like multi-versioning. Today we have issues with usable version of cmake > in CentOS7 so I can > just guess what will be situation with meson. I guess that is the reason > why DPDK still > maintains both Makefiles and meson files, and maintaining both is way we > don't want to go... > > Even on the page you shared there is no major issue highlighted under > Cons. - Cumbersome to > work - yeah, maybe a bit but they have excellent documentation, > Some simple things are more complicated than necessary. - hmm, I'm more > concerned about having > simple solutions to more complicated things... > > Anyway, it is what it is, we moved to cmake recently so it is not right > time to discuss > about changing it again, specially without roadblocks in front of us... > > -- > Damjan > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. > > View/Reply Online (#10825): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/10825 > Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/27333225/541103 > Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io > Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub [bur...@gmail.com] > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#10859): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/10859 Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/27333225/21656 Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [vpp-dev] meson build?
> On Oct 15, 2018, at 5:12 PM, Wiles, Keith wrote: > > > >> On Oct 15, 2018, at 4:51 PM, Damjan Marion via Lists.Fd.Io >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> On 15 Oct 2018, at 21:42, Stephen Hemminger >>> wrote: >>> >>> Has VPP ever considered using Meson, which seems to be where most userspace >>> projects are headed for build systems. >>> >>> http://mesonbuild.com/Comparisons.html >> >> Before I went into cmake direction, i spent significant amount of time >> looking into meson. >> Actually I come to the point where I am able to build vpp with meson >> generated ninja files. >> I thought, if we are changing let's change to something modern but after >> spending time on it >> i was not convinced it is right way to go. Beside the personal animosity >> towards python based >> tools installed trough pip, i was not able to find quick and obvious way to >> do some "special things" we need >> like multi-versioning. Today we have issues with usable version of cmake in >> CentOS7 so I can >> just guess what will be situation with meson. I guess that is the reason why >> DPDK still >> maintains both Makefiles and meson files, and maintaining both is way we >> don't want to go… > > We maintain both util meson support is completed and then in a few releases > we can remove the Makefiles. It is always possible it will take awhile to > remove the makefiles only because of the distro releases have to catchup to > meson builds. > > Meson works pretty well over all, but the last time I tried to get Pktgen to > use meson it was difficult to use the subproject support in meson and the > DPDK meson needs to the provide information in its objects to have the > external application to find header files and archives without me have to > list them in the pktgen meson files. Even if you do not use the subproject > support it became difficult to address where all of the requires files were > located. I do not install DPDK, which may have made it easier to use meson, > but that was a requirement of mine. > > As far as speed in build meson wins hands down over just about everything I > have seen, when building a large project. I wish meson was easier to use with > non-installed projects and non-subproject builds. Using python does not > bother me much, seems to be somewhat fast to parse the meson files, but I did > notice some very long pauses and I assumed it was crunching on the huge > number of depends, headers and sources files. One more point is you want the backend of your build system to spit out ninja readable file, then you get the best performance and I think CMake supports output in Ninja not sure at what level. > >> >> Even on the page you shared there is no major issue highlighted under Cons. >> - Cumbersome to >> work - yeah, maybe a bit but they have excellent documentation, >> Some simple things are more complicated than necessary. - hmm, I'm more >> concerned about having >> simple solutions to more complicated things... >> >> Anyway, it is what it is, we moved to cmake recently so it is not right time >> to discuss >> about changing it again, specially without roadblocks in front of us... >> >> -- >> Damjan >> >> >> >> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- >> Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. >> >> View/Reply Online (#10825): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/10825 >> Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/27333225/675169 >> Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub [keith.wi...@intel.com] >> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > > Regards, > Keith > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. > > View/Reply Online (#10827): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/10827 > Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/27333225/675169 > Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io > Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub [keith.wi...@intel.com] > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Regards, Keith -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#10828): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/10828 Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/27333225/21656 Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [vpp-dev] meson build?
> On Oct 15, 2018, at 4:51 PM, Damjan Marion via Lists.Fd.Io > wrote: > > > >> On 15 Oct 2018, at 21:42, Stephen Hemminger >> wrote: >> >> Has VPP ever considered using Meson, which seems to be where most userspace >> projects are headed for build systems. >> >> http://mesonbuild.com/Comparisons.html > > Before I went into cmake direction, i spent significant amount of time > looking into meson. > Actually I come to the point where I am able to build vpp with meson > generated ninja files. > I thought, if we are changing let's change to something modern but after > spending time on it > i was not convinced it is right way to go. Beside the personal animosity > towards python based > tools installed trough pip, i was not able to find quick and obvious way to > do some "special things" we need > like multi-versioning. Today we have issues with usable version of cmake in > CentOS7 so I can > just guess what will be situation with meson. I guess that is the reason why > DPDK still > maintains both Makefiles and meson files, and maintaining both is way we > don't want to go… We maintain both util meson support is completed and then in a few releases we can remove the Makefiles. It is always possible it will take awhile to remove the makefiles only because of the distro releases have to catchup to meson builds. Meson works pretty well over all, but the last time I tried to get Pktgen to use meson it was difficult to use the subproject support in meson and the DPDK meson needs to the provide information in its objects to have the external application to find header files and archives without me have to list them in the pktgen meson files. Even if you do not use the subproject support it became difficult to address where all of the requires files were located. I do not install DPDK, which may have made it easier to use meson, but that was a requirement of mine. As far as speed in build meson wins hands down over just about everything I have seen, when building a large project. I wish meson was easier to use with non-installed projects and non-subproject builds. Using python does not bother me much, seems to be somewhat fast to parse the meson files, but I did notice some very long pauses and I assumed it was crunching on the huge number of depends, headers and sources files. > > Even on the page you shared there is no major issue highlighted under Cons. > - Cumbersome to > work - yeah, maybe a bit but they have excellent documentation, > Some simple things are more complicated than necessary. - hmm, I'm more > concerned about having > simple solutions to more complicated things... > > Anyway, it is what it is, we moved to cmake recently so it is not right time > to discuss > about changing it again, specially without roadblocks in front of us... > > -- > Damjan > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. > > View/Reply Online (#10825): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/10825 > Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/27333225/675169 > Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io > Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub [keith.wi...@intel.com] > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Regards, Keith -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#10827): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/10827 Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/27333225/21656 Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [vpp-dev] meson build?
On Mon, 15 Oct 2018 23:51:04 +0200 Damjan Marion wrote: > > On 15 Oct 2018, at 21:42, Stephen Hemminger > > wrote: > > > > Has VPP ever considered using Meson, which seems to be where most userspace > > projects are headed for build systems. > > > > http://mesonbuild.com/Comparisons.html > > Before I went into cmake direction, i spent significant amount of time > looking into meson. > Actually I come to the point where I am able to build vpp with meson > generated ninja files. > I thought, if we are changing let's change to something modern but after > spending time on it > i was not convinced it is right way to go. Beside the personal animosity > towards python based > tools installed trough pip, i was not able to find quick and obvious way to > do some "special things" we need > like multi-versioning. Today we have issues with usable version of cmake in > CentOS7 so I can > just guess what will be situation with meson. I guess that is the reason why > DPDK still > maintains both Makefiles and meson files, and maintaining both is way we > don't want to go... > > Even on the page you shared there is no major issue highlighted under Cons. > - Cumbersome to > work - yeah, maybe a bit but they have excellent documentation, > Some simple things are more complicated than necessary. - hmm, I'm more > concerned about having > simple solutions to more complicated things... > > Anyway, it is what it is, we moved to cmake recently so it is not right time > to discuss > about changing it again, specially without roadblocks in front of us... > Thanks for the history. I have no great love for any tool. In fact, have a real dislike for complex build systems. Too often, it means reverse engineering yet another macro language. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#10826): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/10826 Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/27333225/21656 Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [vpp-dev] meson build?
> On 15 Oct 2018, at 21:42, Stephen Hemminger > wrote: > > Has VPP ever considered using Meson, which seems to be where most userspace > projects are headed for build systems. > > http://mesonbuild.com/Comparisons.html Before I went into cmake direction, i spent significant amount of time looking into meson. Actually I come to the point where I am able to build vpp with meson generated ninja files. I thought, if we are changing let's change to something modern but after spending time on it i was not convinced it is right way to go. Beside the personal animosity towards python based tools installed trough pip, i was not able to find quick and obvious way to do some "special things" we need like multi-versioning. Today we have issues with usable version of cmake in CentOS7 so I can just guess what will be situation with meson. I guess that is the reason why DPDK still maintains both Makefiles and meson files, and maintaining both is way we don't want to go... Even on the page you shared there is no major issue highlighted under Cons. - Cumbersome to work - yeah, maybe a bit but they have excellent documentation, Some simple things are more complicated than necessary. - hmm, I'm more concerned about having simple solutions to more complicated things... Anyway, it is what it is, we moved to cmake recently so it is not right time to discuss about changing it again, specially without roadblocks in front of us... -- Damjan -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#10825): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/10825 Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/27333225/21656 Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [vpp-dev] meson build?
with all due respect, please, god, no. the switch was just made to cmake and many of us are still coping with that... On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 9:42 AM Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > Has VPP ever considered using Meson, which seems to be where most userspace > projects are headed for build systems. > > http://mesonbuild.com/Comparisons.html > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. > > View/Reply Online (#10823): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/10823 > Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/27333225/675628 > Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io > Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub [d...@dogwood.com] > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -- Kailua, Hawaiʻi US +1 (808) 728-3050 UK +44 (020) 3286 2808 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#10824): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/10824 Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/27333225/21656 Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
[vpp-dev] meson build?
Has VPP ever considered using Meson, which seems to be where most userspace projects are headed for build systems. http://mesonbuild.com/Comparisons.html -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#10823): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/10823 Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/27333225/21656 Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
