On Thu Jun 29, 2023 at 2:02 PM CDT, Andres Freund wrote: > Hi, > > On 2023-06-13 14:56:36 -0500, Tristan Partin wrote: > > I was thinking today. When you initially wrote the build, did you try > > using the src/bin/meson.build file as the place where all the binaries > > were built? As you say, most of the src/bin/xxx/meson.build files are > > extrememly reptitive. > > > We had a similar-ish issue in my last project which I solved like: > > > > https://github.com/hse-project/hse/blob/master/tools/meson.build#L20-L405 > > > > This is a pattern I used quite frequently in that project. One benefit > > of this approach is that the binaries all end up next to each other in > > the build tree which is eventually how they'll be laid out in the > > install destination. The other benefit is of course reducing reptitive > > code. > > I think the build directory and the source code directory not matching in > structure would have made it considerably harder sell for people to migrate. > > I.e. I considered it, but due to meson's "no outputs outside of the current > directory" rule, it didn't (and sadly still doesn't) really seem viable.
Yeah, I guess it is a matter if you like the layout being closer to the installation or the source tree at the expense of repetition. I am partial to the installation since it is less to type if you run a binary from the build directory and less repetition, but all good. Maybe something that could be reconsidered when autotools is dropped. I still think the overrides are important, at the very least for libpq, but I will defer to your aforementioned decision for now. -- Tristan Partin Neon (https://neon.tech)
