Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues a écrit : > A new build system for LTP would be really great for the reasons Cai > mentioned. Autoconf is something that most developers are used with, but > I personally don't like that much. There are other fairly recent build > systems, such as waf (http://code.google.com/p/waf/) that are very light > on dependencies, are fast and flexible. On my spare time I was working > on a 'minimal' ltp tree, exchanging the makefiles by waf files, was > planning to show when it would be ready for use. > > That said, autoconf is less intrusive on the current workflow of most > developers, since they are already used to it, so it might be a better > option. > > My personal preference is for waf, since with a simple 100K script at > the top directory and waf files instead of make files we can have a > powerful and mostly self contained build environment. But the long time > developers know better what would be best for LTP.
I don't know Waf but I've used alternate build tools. ie. SCons proves to be very efficient fast and much easier than autoconf/automake. Also, it's entirely dynamic : you don't need to re-run autoconf if you add a new #include in a source file. Gilles. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
