Sounds good to me.

Separate "contrib" directory sounds good too. We may want to move some
existing ports to there, like say cocos2d.

On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 3:29 PM 'Sam Clegg' via emscripten-discuss <
[email protected]> wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 2:28 PM Alon Zakai <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Yeah, I think we can add repos to emscripten-ports for things like that.
> We don't need to add support in the emscripten repo itself for them, which
> does make it more like nacl-ports. So there would be two tiers in
> emscripten-ports support; they'd all be in emscripten-ports, but only some
> would have code in emscripten itself.
> >
> > Concretely here, we could add ffmpeg to emscripten-ports but not to
> emscripten, and add a test in emscripten, and then we'd get regression
> tests to avoid issues there, which given the history could be useful. The
> only objection I might have to that is if the test is very slow. Otherwise,
> if someone's interested to do it, it sounds good to me.
> >
>
> I broadly agree with the approach.  One thing to note is that more
> ports should not need to be forked to exist in this system.   It
> should be enough to commit a simple build recipe (e.g. emconfigure &&
> emake) along with an upstream URL.    The emscripten-ports
> organization is mostly used/useful for hosting forked repos.   I think
> I'm suggesting something more like the "emscripten/tools/ports" tree,
> where each project is represented by some metadata and they all live
> in the same tree.
>
> For now I propose the following:
> 1. Add ffmpeg to "emscripten/tools/ports".  Use emmake and emconfgiure
> here to mimic the build process used by upstream/Beuc.
> 2. Add an optional flag to mark ports as "contrib" or "second tier".
> This would signal that normal CI doesn't build them, and they don't
> get built by "embuilder build ALL" or get listed by default by
> "embuilder list".
>
> Perhaps we can use a subdirectory called "contrib" under
> "emscripten/tools/ports".  Any ports in that tree would be less
> frequently tested and have a lower bar for entry.  Then we can have
> people add whatever ports they want there.
>
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 10:59 PM Gabriel Cuvillier <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Regarding the Emscripten "Ports", why not having something like NaCL
> >> "Web Ports" system ?
> >>
> >> https://chromium.googlesource.com/webports
> >>
> >> For example, the list of ports for Pepper 47 version:
> >>
> >>
> https://chromium.googlesource.com/webports/+/pepper_47/docs/port_list.md
> >>
> >>
> >> This is a 3rd party repository (that is, not in NaCL main tree) for
> >> projects buildable on the NaCl platform. It was a very handy by the
> time.
> >>
> >> I understand the reluctance to have every possible ports in the
> >> Emscripten tree (apart maybe some very common stuff, such as SDL2, zlib
> >> or Freetype), though having a "ports ecosystem" is nevertheless
> >> something needed
> >>
> >>
> >> Le 09/10/2019 à 22:18, 'Sam Clegg' via emscripten-discuss a écrit :
> >> > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 3:05 AM Sylvain Beucler <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >> Hi,
> >> >>
> >> >> On 08/10/2019 21:12, 'Sam Clegg' via emscripten-discuss wrote:
> >> >>> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 12:35 PM Beuc <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >>>> I just upgraded 1.38.45->1.38.46 and I got a new build failure in
> an unmodified ffmpeg build.
> >> >>>> Which is also what happened last time I upgraded Emscripten 1
> month ago (different error).
> >> >>>> I don't see wasm-ld-related notes in the ChangeLog, but apparently
> it got stricter again.
> >> >>>> Compiling a few external libs may actually be a good release test
> case for the Emscripten project ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
> >> >>>>
> >> >>> I think are you referring to this bug
> >> >>> https://github.com/emscripten-core/emscripten/issues/9565?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The good news is that we now have a unit test to cover that specific
> >> >>> issue.  But I agree we also need larger system tests.  Perhaps we
> >> >>> could add ffmpeg to our build somehow, perhaps via an improved ports
> >> >>> system.
> >> >> This one, and #9566 (probably related to Python w/ sockets build).
> >> >>
> >> >> "perhaps via an improved ports system": I wouldn't recommend it,
> because
> >> >> IMHO the point of Emscripten is to build libraries as-is (through
> >> >> emconfigure/emmake), rather "port" them individually. For instance
> the
> >> >> SDL2 port is a bad use case for this test, since its build system is
> >> >> remade from scratch and Emscripten-specific. We want to test a
> >> >> vanilla/portable external build here.
> >> >>
> >> > Sorry, thats not what I meant.   I just mean some kind of repository
> >> > of packages that are known to be buildable with emscripten.   I didn't
> >> > mean we should do work on the upstream projects to port them.
> >> >
> >> > A bit of background:  I've been pushing back on adding more ports
> >> > recently because I'm not sure we want to have every open source
> >> > package in the emscripten tree itself.  So what I mean when I say
> >> > improved ports system is some way to list third party packages that
> >> > are buildable (along with the build recipe), that are not necessarily
> >> > part of the "core" emscripten but should certainly be tested with each
> >> > release.   I don't know that best way to achieve this just yet.
> >> > Perhaps something in the emscripten tree?  or perhaps an external repo
> >> > (like llvm's test suite: https://llvm.org/docs/TestSuiteGuide.html)?
> >> > Perhaps driven by embuilder?  Perhaps not?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> Cheers!
> >> >> Sylvain
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "emscripten-discuss" group.
> >> >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
> send an email to [email protected].
> >> >> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/emscripten-discuss/396623d9-674b-88ce-1c78-62b43b7b1090%40beuc.net
> .
> >>
> >> --
> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "emscripten-discuss" group.
> >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to [email protected].
> >> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/emscripten-discuss/421d3f5d-0b5b-dcc2-4e29-03e4fe9c7dd4%40gmail.com
> .
> >
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "emscripten-discuss" group.
> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to [email protected].
> > To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/emscripten-discuss/CAEX4NpQi9AxwcOYaH_VND%2B9rF%3Dnkx1w2K%3DN60UQ3zSmcyS__PA%40mail.gmail.com
> .
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "emscripten-discuss" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/emscripten-discuss/CAL_va28ik-mb7pop9PyU_O-P3SZ6rK%3DCB2kkCSO7ZgivoiLM8g%40mail.gmail.com
> .
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"emscripten-discuss" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/emscripten-discuss/CAEX4NpSAHNqHQbJStth-ynca0TDyG2tJuF3v4hDewx52MTNpog%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to