Andrew Stormont <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 5 Sep 2012, at 18:04, Nick Zivkovic <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I think that Andrew want to use a unified build system, instead of the
> > loose confederation of radically different systems that's currently in
> > use.
> >
> > I agree. A unified build system is necessary. The only question is:
> > what should it be?
> >
> > Makefile-based, like ports/pkgsrc/oi-build?
> > specfile-based?
> > tcl-base like macports?
> > shell-based like Gentoo's and Exherbo's?
> > python-based like conary?
>
> Userland already has a perfectly good build system. I don't understand what
> you're trying to accomplish here.
I asume that what you call "userland" is the successor for "sfw".
The buildsystem for sfw is a nightmare:
- It only works if the whole set of tools has already been
installed in /usr on the compiling system before with exactly
the same version as the one that is going to be compiled.
This causes that you need an unknown number of iteration to
compile and install on the build machine before you are able
to compile everything at all.
You need at least one additional install/compile cycle before you
can be sure that the compile/link results will no longer change.
- It may be that you would need to manually install at least older
versions of strategic tools before you may start to compile at all.
The programs in question are gmake, bash, gm4, ...
- It installs unmodified autoconf results in /usr/include with the
effect that you cannot compile depending other software using
an older version of the compilers than the one you used to compile
sfw.
Are these problems still in effect?
Jörg
--
EMail:[email protected] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[email protected] (uni)
[email protected] (work) Blog:
http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
_______________________________________________
oi-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
