hmm, on Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 10:44:01PM +1100, Ian McWilliam said that
> Look, the Samba folk decided from 3.6.16 to change the build
> environment that had been with the 3.6 branch for 15 releases to
> python and waf.
>
> Our in-ports tree waf was out of date to use. Some discussion was
> had about updating this. Not sure what happened after that.
i know this won't make me any friends on ports@
but waf is not the root of all evil.
the "waf philosophy" is to bundle it with a given project,
to become "part of the project". that is why it does
not "need" to be "package friendly", it is not meant
to be used from a package. if it helps, think of it
as waf == configure and not cmake or such. configure
is also always bundled and nobody cares.
so the bundled version is the definite version that
should be used. (actually the problematic projects are
the ones that dont bundle it...)
it takes a bit of getting used to, but i dont see how
it's 'much worse' then megabytes of gnu style shell
code and m4.
you do a 'waf configure ${CONFIGURE_ARGS}' then
'waf build' and lastly 'waf install'. the horror.
> Unfortunately that busted how we handle shared library versioning on
> OpenBSD.
i am not good with shared library versioning so
i cannot comment on that, but the build result
should be binaries, and those can be renamed
and copied in many ways :]
is samba4 also waf? i'll try to have a look
when i get stable internet connection in 2 weeks
time.
-f
--
if you can't see black, white has no meaning
