Re: [PATCH libdrm] RELEASING: update instructions to use meson instead of autotools
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 02:33:04PM -0800, Dylan Baker wrote: > Quoting Emil Velikov (2019-02-19 08:51:18) > > On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 15:36, Dylan Baker wrote: > > > > > > Quoting Daniel Vetter (2019-02-19 07:20:12) > > > > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 3:02 PM Eric Engestrom > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, 2019-02-19 13:53:25 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 12:57 PM Emil Velikov > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 at 17:42, Eric Engestrom > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thursday, 2018-12-20 11:53:11 -0800, Dylan Baker wrote: > > > > > > > > > Quoting Eric Engestrom (2018-12-19 08:23:40) > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > RELEASING | 27 --- > > > > > > > > > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/RELEASING b/RELEASING > > > > > > > > > > index 7e03e3b9acb1cbfb261a..d1ad8e3b4ad16d4ca14f 100644 > > > > > > > > > > --- a/RELEASING > > > > > > > > > > +++ b/RELEASING > > > > > > > > > > @@ -9,25 +9,14 @@ However, this is up to whoever is driving > > > > > > > > > > the feature in question. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Follow these steps to release a new version of libdrm: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - 1) Bump the version number in configure.ac and > > > > > > > > > > meson.build. We seem > > > > > > > > > > - to have settled for 2.4.x as the versioning scheme > > > > > > > > > > for libdrm, so > > > > > > > > > > - just bump the micro version. > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > > - 2) Run autoconf and then re-run ./configure so the build > > > > > > > > > > system > > > > > > > > > > - picks up the new version number. > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > > - 3) Verify that the code passes "make distcheck". > > > > > > > > > > Running "make > > > > > > > > > > - distcheck" should result in no warnings or errors and > > > > > > > > > > end with a > > > > > > > > > > - message of the form: > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > > - = > > > > > > > > > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z archives ready for distribution: > > > > > > > > > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z.tar.gz > > > > > > > > > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z.tar.bz2 > > > > > > > > > > - = > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > > - Make sure that the version number reported by > > > > > > > > > > distcheck and in > > > > > > > > > > - the tarball names matches the number you bumped to in > > > > > > > > > > configure.ac. > > > > > > > > > > + 1) Bump the version number in meson.build. We seem to > > > > > > > > > > have settled for > > > > > > > > > > + 2.4.x as the versioning scheme for libdrm, so just > > > > > > > > > > bump the micro > > > > > > > > > > + version. > > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > > > + 2) Run `ninja -C builddir/ dist` to generate the > > > > > > > > > > tarballs. > > > > > > > > > > + Make sure that the version number of the tarball name > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > + builddir/meson-dist/ matches the number you bumped > > > > > > > > > > to. Move that > > > > > > > > > > + tarball to the libdrm repo root for the release > > > > > > > > > > script to pick up. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >4) Push the updated master branch with the bumped > > > > > > > > > > version number: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just noticed I forgot to decrement item 4 & 5 :] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > > > Eric > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Acked-by: Dylan Baker > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But you should probably get someone other than just me to > > > > > > > > > look at this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no "libdrm maintainer", which makes everyone a libdrm > > > > > > > > maintainer :] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If nobody object, I'll push this in a few weeks (there's really > > > > > > > > no rush, > > > > > > > > but I want to make that move at some point, we have no reason > > > > > > > > to stay > > > > > > > > dependant on autotools now that we have better tools). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Must admit I'm not the biggest fan. I can see this being cool for > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > maintainer, if autotools was was present on their system. > > > > > > > The unfortunate reality is - it's there for the foreseeable > > > > > > > future. > > > > > > > If anything it makes it more annoying for those using > > > > > > > autotools/make - > > > > > > > regardless if they like doing so or not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So that's a nack from me :-\ > > > > > > > > > > > > Not really following what's the downside is of using meson to cut > > > > > > the > > > > >
Re: [PATCH libdrm] RELEASING: update instructions to use meson instead of autotools
Quoting Emil Velikov (2019-02-19 08:51:18) > On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 15:36, Dylan Baker wrote: > > > > Quoting Daniel Vetter (2019-02-19 07:20:12) > > > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 3:02 PM Eric Engestrom > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, 2019-02-19 13:53:25 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 12:57 PM Emil Velikov > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 at 17:42, Eric Engestrom > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thursday, 2018-12-20 11:53:11 -0800, Dylan Baker wrote: > > > > > > > > Quoting Eric Engestrom (2018-12-19 08:23:40) > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > RELEASING | 27 --- > > > > > > > > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/RELEASING b/RELEASING > > > > > > > > > index 7e03e3b9acb1cbfb261a..d1ad8e3b4ad16d4ca14f 100644 > > > > > > > > > --- a/RELEASING > > > > > > > > > +++ b/RELEASING > > > > > > > > > @@ -9,25 +9,14 @@ However, this is up to whoever is driving > > > > > > > > > the feature in question. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Follow these steps to release a new version of libdrm: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - 1) Bump the version number in configure.ac and > > > > > > > > > meson.build. We seem > > > > > > > > > - to have settled for 2.4.x as the versioning scheme for > > > > > > > > > libdrm, so > > > > > > > > > - just bump the micro version. > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > - 2) Run autoconf and then re-run ./configure so the build > > > > > > > > > system > > > > > > > > > - picks up the new version number. > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > - 3) Verify that the code passes "make distcheck". Running > > > > > > > > > "make > > > > > > > > > - distcheck" should result in no warnings or errors and > > > > > > > > > end with a > > > > > > > > > - message of the form: > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > - = > > > > > > > > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z archives ready for distribution: > > > > > > > > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z.tar.gz > > > > > > > > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z.tar.bz2 > > > > > > > > > - = > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > - Make sure that the version number reported by distcheck > > > > > > > > > and in > > > > > > > > > - the tarball names matches the number you bumped to in > > > > > > > > > configure.ac. > > > > > > > > > + 1) Bump the version number in meson.build. We seem to have > > > > > > > > > settled for > > > > > > > > > + 2.4.x as the versioning scheme for libdrm, so just bump > > > > > > > > > the micro > > > > > > > > > + version. > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > > + 2) Run `ninja -C builddir/ dist` to generate the tarballs. > > > > > > > > > + Make sure that the version number of the tarball name in > > > > > > > > > + builddir/meson-dist/ matches the number you bumped to. > > > > > > > > > Move that > > > > > > > > > + tarball to the libdrm repo root for the release script > > > > > > > > > to pick up. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >4) Push the updated master branch with the bumped version > > > > > > > > > number: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just noticed I forgot to decrement item 4 & 5 :] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > > Eric > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Acked-by: Dylan Baker > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But you should probably get someone other than just me to look > > > > > > > > at this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no "libdrm maintainer", which makes everyone a libdrm > > > > > > > maintainer :] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If nobody object, I'll push this in a few weeks (there's really > > > > > > > no rush, > > > > > > > but I want to make that move at some point, we have no reason to > > > > > > > stay > > > > > > > dependant on autotools now that we have better tools). > > > > > > > > > > > > Must admit I'm not the biggest fan. I can see this being cool for > > > > > > the > > > > > > maintainer, if autotools was was present on their system. > > > > > > The unfortunate reality is - it's there for the foreseeable future. > > > > > > If anything it makes it more annoying for those using > > > > > > autotools/make - > > > > > > regardless if they like doing so or not. > > > > > > > > > > > > So that's a nack from me :-\ > > > > > > > > > > Not really following what's the downside is of using meson to cut the > > > > > release tarball? Resulting tarball should still be able to build fine > > > > > with automake. If the concern is that automake will bitrot, then I > > > > > think a much better solution is to add a few automake targets to the > > > > > gitlab ci autobuilder stuff. That's what we've done for igt at least, > > > > > works neatly. > > > > >
Re: [PATCH libdrm] RELEASING: update instructions to use meson instead of autotools
On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 15:36, Dylan Baker wrote: > > Quoting Daniel Vetter (2019-02-19 07:20:12) > > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 3:02 PM Eric Engestrom > > wrote: > > > > > > On Tuesday, 2019-02-19 13:53:25 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 12:57 PM Emil Velikov > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 at 17:42, Eric Engestrom > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thursday, 2018-12-20 11:53:11 -0800, Dylan Baker wrote: > > > > > > > Quoting Eric Engestrom (2018-12-19 08:23:40) > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > RELEASING | 27 --- > > > > > > > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/RELEASING b/RELEASING > > > > > > > > index 7e03e3b9acb1cbfb261a..d1ad8e3b4ad16d4ca14f 100644 > > > > > > > > --- a/RELEASING > > > > > > > > +++ b/RELEASING > > > > > > > > @@ -9,25 +9,14 @@ However, this is up to whoever is driving the > > > > > > > > feature in question. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Follow these steps to release a new version of libdrm: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - 1) Bump the version number in configure.ac and meson.build. > > > > > > > > We seem > > > > > > > > - to have settled for 2.4.x as the versioning scheme for > > > > > > > > libdrm, so > > > > > > > > - just bump the micro version. > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > - 2) Run autoconf and then re-run ./configure so the build > > > > > > > > system > > > > > > > > - picks up the new version number. > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > - 3) Verify that the code passes "make distcheck". Running > > > > > > > > "make > > > > > > > > - distcheck" should result in no warnings or errors and end > > > > > > > > with a > > > > > > > > - message of the form: > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > - = > > > > > > > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z archives ready for distribution: > > > > > > > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z.tar.gz > > > > > > > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z.tar.bz2 > > > > > > > > - = > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > - Make sure that the version number reported by distcheck > > > > > > > > and in > > > > > > > > - the tarball names matches the number you bumped to in > > > > > > > > configure.ac. > > > > > > > > + 1) Bump the version number in meson.build. We seem to have > > > > > > > > settled for > > > > > > > > + 2.4.x as the versioning scheme for libdrm, so just bump > > > > > > > > the micro > > > > > > > > + version. > > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > + 2) Run `ninja -C builddir/ dist` to generate the tarballs. > > > > > > > > + Make sure that the version number of the tarball name in > > > > > > > > + builddir/meson-dist/ matches the number you bumped to. > > > > > > > > Move that > > > > > > > > + tarball to the libdrm repo root for the release script to > > > > > > > > pick up. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >4) Push the updated master branch with the bumped version > > > > > > > > number: > > > > > > > > > > > > Just noticed I forgot to decrement item 4 & 5 :] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > Eric > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Acked-by: Dylan Baker > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But you should probably get someone other than just me to look at > > > > > > > this. > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no "libdrm maintainer", which makes everyone a libdrm > > > > > > maintainer :] > > > > > > > > > > > > If nobody object, I'll push this in a few weeks (there's really no > > > > > > rush, > > > > > > but I want to make that move at some point, we have no reason to > > > > > > stay > > > > > > dependant on autotools now that we have better tools). > > > > > > > > > > Must admit I'm not the biggest fan. I can see this being cool for the > > > > > maintainer, if autotools was was present on their system. > > > > > The unfortunate reality is - it's there for the foreseeable future. > > > > > If anything it makes it more annoying for those using autotools/make - > > > > > regardless if they like doing so or not. > > > > > > > > > > So that's a nack from me :-\ > > > > > > > > Not really following what's the downside is of using meson to cut the > > > > release tarball? Resulting tarball should still be able to build fine > > > > with automake. If the concern is that automake will bitrot, then I > > > > think a much better solution is to add a few automake targets to the > > > > gitlab ci autobuilder stuff. That's what we've done for igt at least, > > > > works neatly. > > > meson dist is effectively a git tarball. Hence one cannot simply "./configure && make" it > > > Agreed, and to me using meson has a huge upside: it packages what's in > > > git, > > > unlike autotools which packages whatever was on your machine at the time. If meson doesn't use any of
Re: [PATCH libdrm] RELEASING: update instructions to use meson instead of autotools
Quoting Daniel Vetter (2019-02-19 07:20:12) > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 3:02 PM Eric Engestrom > wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, 2019-02-19 13:53:25 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 12:57 PM Emil Velikov > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 at 17:42, Eric Engestrom > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Thursday, 2018-12-20 11:53:11 -0800, Dylan Baker wrote: > > > > > > Quoting Eric Engestrom (2018-12-19 08:23:40) > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > RELEASING | 27 --- > > > > > > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/RELEASING b/RELEASING > > > > > > > index 7e03e3b9acb1cbfb261a..d1ad8e3b4ad16d4ca14f 100644 > > > > > > > --- a/RELEASING > > > > > > > +++ b/RELEASING > > > > > > > @@ -9,25 +9,14 @@ However, this is up to whoever is driving the > > > > > > > feature in question. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Follow these steps to release a new version of libdrm: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - 1) Bump the version number in configure.ac and meson.build. We > > > > > > > seem > > > > > > > - to have settled for 2.4.x as the versioning scheme for > > > > > > > libdrm, so > > > > > > > - just bump the micro version. > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > - 2) Run autoconf and then re-run ./configure so the build system > > > > > > > - picks up the new version number. > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > - 3) Verify that the code passes "make distcheck". Running "make > > > > > > > - distcheck" should result in no warnings or errors and end > > > > > > > with a > > > > > > > - message of the form: > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > - = > > > > > > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z archives ready for distribution: > > > > > > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z.tar.gz > > > > > > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z.tar.bz2 > > > > > > > - = > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > - Make sure that the version number reported by distcheck and > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > - the tarball names matches the number you bumped to in > > > > > > > configure.ac. > > > > > > > + 1) Bump the version number in meson.build. We seem to have > > > > > > > settled for > > > > > > > + 2.4.x as the versioning scheme for libdrm, so just bump the > > > > > > > micro > > > > > > > + version. > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > + 2) Run `ninja -C builddir/ dist` to generate the tarballs. > > > > > > > + Make sure that the version number of the tarball name in > > > > > > > + builddir/meson-dist/ matches the number you bumped to. Move > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > + tarball to the libdrm repo root for the release script to > > > > > > > pick up. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >4) Push the updated master branch with the bumped version > > > > > > > number: > > > > > > > > > > Just noticed I forgot to decrement item 4 & 5 :] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > Eric > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Acked-by: Dylan Baker > > > > > > > > > > > > But you should probably get someone other than just me to look at > > > > > > this. > > > > > > > > > > There is no "libdrm maintainer", which makes everyone a libdrm > > > > > maintainer :] > > > > > > > > > > If nobody object, I'll push this in a few weeks (there's really no > > > > > rush, > > > > > but I want to make that move at some point, we have no reason to stay > > > > > dependant on autotools now that we have better tools). > > > > > > > > Must admit I'm not the biggest fan. I can see this being cool for the > > > > maintainer, if autotools was was present on their system. > > > > The unfortunate reality is - it's there for the foreseeable future. > > > > If anything it makes it more annoying for those using autotools/make - > > > > regardless if they like doing so or not. > > > > > > > > So that's a nack from me :-\ > > > > > > Not really following what's the downside is of using meson to cut the > > > release tarball? Resulting tarball should still be able to build fine > > > with automake. If the concern is that automake will bitrot, then I > > > think a much better solution is to add a few automake targets to the > > > gitlab ci autobuilder stuff. That's what we've done for igt at least, > > > works neatly. > > > > Agreed, and to me using meson has a huge upside: it packages what's in git, > > unlike autotools which packages whatever was on your machine at the time. > > This makes it much less likely to accidentally send files with local > > modifications or add/remove files without meaning to. > > > > Like I said though, there's no rush, so let's make sure issues are > > addressed first. > > > > I'll add a CI job to run `make distcheck` on releases (libdrm-* tags). > > I'd go with make check only. make distcheck needs all the manual > fiddling in makefile templates (EXTRA_DIST and friends)
Re: [PATCH libdrm] RELEASING: update instructions to use meson instead of autotools
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 3:02 PM Eric Engestrom wrote: > > On Tuesday, 2019-02-19 13:53:25 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 12:57 PM Emil Velikov > > wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 at 17:42, Eric Engestrom > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thursday, 2018-12-20 11:53:11 -0800, Dylan Baker wrote: > > > > > Quoting Eric Engestrom (2018-12-19 08:23:40) > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom > > > > > > --- > > > > > > RELEASING | 27 --- > > > > > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/RELEASING b/RELEASING > > > > > > index 7e03e3b9acb1cbfb261a..d1ad8e3b4ad16d4ca14f 100644 > > > > > > --- a/RELEASING > > > > > > +++ b/RELEASING > > > > > > @@ -9,25 +9,14 @@ However, this is up to whoever is driving the > > > > > > feature in question. > > > > > > > > > > > > Follow these steps to release a new version of libdrm: > > > > > > > > > > > > - 1) Bump the version number in configure.ac and meson.build. We > > > > > > seem > > > > > > - to have settled for 2.4.x as the versioning scheme for > > > > > > libdrm, so > > > > > > - just bump the micro version. > > > > > > - > > > > > > - 2) Run autoconf and then re-run ./configure so the build system > > > > > > - picks up the new version number. > > > > > > - > > > > > > - 3) Verify that the code passes "make distcheck". Running "make > > > > > > - distcheck" should result in no warnings or errors and end > > > > > > with a > > > > > > - message of the form: > > > > > > - > > > > > > - = > > > > > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z archives ready for distribution: > > > > > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z.tar.gz > > > > > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z.tar.bz2 > > > > > > - = > > > > > > - > > > > > > - Make sure that the version number reported by distcheck and in > > > > > > - the tarball names matches the number you bumped to in > > > > > > configure.ac. > > > > > > + 1) Bump the version number in meson.build. We seem to have > > > > > > settled for > > > > > > + 2.4.x as the versioning scheme for libdrm, so just bump the > > > > > > micro > > > > > > + version. > > > > > > + > > > > > > + 2) Run `ninja -C builddir/ dist` to generate the tarballs. > > > > > > + Make sure that the version number of the tarball name in > > > > > > + builddir/meson-dist/ matches the number you bumped to. Move > > > > > > that > > > > > > + tarball to the libdrm repo root for the release script to > > > > > > pick up. > > > > > > > > > > > >4) Push the updated master branch with the bumped version number: > > > > > > > > Just noticed I forgot to decrement item 4 & 5 :] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Eric > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Acked-by: Dylan Baker > > > > > > > > > > But you should probably get someone other than just me to look at > > > > > this. > > > > > > > > There is no "libdrm maintainer", which makes everyone a libdrm > > > > maintainer :] > > > > > > > > If nobody object, I'll push this in a few weeks (there's really no rush, > > > > but I want to make that move at some point, we have no reason to stay > > > > dependant on autotools now that we have better tools). > > > > > > Must admit I'm not the biggest fan. I can see this being cool for the > > > maintainer, if autotools was was present on their system. > > > The unfortunate reality is - it's there for the foreseeable future. > > > If anything it makes it more annoying for those using autotools/make - > > > regardless if they like doing so or not. > > > > > > So that's a nack from me :-\ > > > > Not really following what's the downside is of using meson to cut the > > release tarball? Resulting tarball should still be able to build fine > > with automake. If the concern is that automake will bitrot, then I > > think a much better solution is to add a few automake targets to the > > gitlab ci autobuilder stuff. That's what we've done for igt at least, > > works neatly. > > Agreed, and to me using meson has a huge upside: it packages what's in git, > unlike autotools which packages whatever was on your machine at the time. > This makes it much less likely to accidentally send files with local > modifications or add/remove files without meaning to. > > Like I said though, there's no rush, so let's make sure issues are > addressed first. > > I'll add a CI job to run `make distcheck` on releases (libdrm-* tags). I'd go with make check only. make distcheck needs all the manual fiddling in makefile templates (EXTRA_DIST and friends) since automake doesn't do the right thing by default like meson. If we go with meson for making release tarballs, I don't think it makes sense to keep the automake stuff alive. But there's a bunch of compile-time tests in libdrm, run by ninja test and make check, those should keep working imo, at least for
Re: [PATCH libdrm] RELEASING: update instructions to use meson instead of autotools
On Tuesday, 2019-02-19 13:53:25 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 12:57 PM Emil Velikov > wrote: > > > > On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 at 17:42, Eric Engestrom > > wrote: > > > > > > On Thursday, 2018-12-20 11:53:11 -0800, Dylan Baker wrote: > > > > Quoting Eric Engestrom (2018-12-19 08:23:40) > > > > > Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom > > > > > --- > > > > > RELEASING | 27 --- > > > > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/RELEASING b/RELEASING > > > > > index 7e03e3b9acb1cbfb261a..d1ad8e3b4ad16d4ca14f 100644 > > > > > --- a/RELEASING > > > > > +++ b/RELEASING > > > > > @@ -9,25 +9,14 @@ However, this is up to whoever is driving the > > > > > feature in question. > > > > > > > > > > Follow these steps to release a new version of libdrm: > > > > > > > > > > - 1) Bump the version number in configure.ac and meson.build. We seem > > > > > - to have settled for 2.4.x as the versioning scheme for libdrm, > > > > > so > > > > > - just bump the micro version. > > > > > - > > > > > - 2) Run autoconf and then re-run ./configure so the build system > > > > > - picks up the new version number. > > > > > - > > > > > - 3) Verify that the code passes "make distcheck". Running "make > > > > > - distcheck" should result in no warnings or errors and end with a > > > > > - message of the form: > > > > > - > > > > > - = > > > > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z archives ready for distribution: > > > > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z.tar.gz > > > > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z.tar.bz2 > > > > > - = > > > > > - > > > > > - Make sure that the version number reported by distcheck and in > > > > > - the tarball names matches the number you bumped to in > > > > > configure.ac. > > > > > + 1) Bump the version number in meson.build. We seem to have settled > > > > > for > > > > > + 2.4.x as the versioning scheme for libdrm, so just bump the > > > > > micro > > > > > + version. > > > > > + > > > > > + 2) Run `ninja -C builddir/ dist` to generate the tarballs. > > > > > + Make sure that the version number of the tarball name in > > > > > + builddir/meson-dist/ matches the number you bumped to. Move that > > > > > + tarball to the libdrm repo root for the release script to pick > > > > > up. > > > > > > > > > >4) Push the updated master branch with the bumped version number: > > > > > > Just noticed I forgot to decrement item 4 & 5 :] > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > Eric > > > > > > > > > > > > > Acked-by: Dylan Baker > > > > > > > > But you should probably get someone other than just me to look at this. > > > > > > There is no "libdrm maintainer", which makes everyone a libdrm > > > maintainer :] > > > > > > If nobody object, I'll push this in a few weeks (there's really no rush, > > > but I want to make that move at some point, we have no reason to stay > > > dependant on autotools now that we have better tools). > > > > Must admit I'm not the biggest fan. I can see this being cool for the > > maintainer, if autotools was was present on their system. > > The unfortunate reality is - it's there for the foreseeable future. > > If anything it makes it more annoying for those using autotools/make - > > regardless if they like doing so or not. > > > > So that's a nack from me :-\ > > Not really following what's the downside is of using meson to cut the > release tarball? Resulting tarball should still be able to build fine > with automake. If the concern is that automake will bitrot, then I > think a much better solution is to add a few automake targets to the > gitlab ci autobuilder stuff. That's what we've done for igt at least, > works neatly. Agreed, and to me using meson has a huge upside: it packages what's in git, unlike autotools which packages whatever was on your machine at the time. This makes it much less likely to accidentally send files with local modifications or add/remove files without meaning to. Like I said though, there's no rush, so let's make sure issues are addressed first. I'll add a CI job to run `make distcheck` on releases (libdrm-* tags). Emil, would that be enough, or was your concern something else? ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: [PATCH libdrm] RELEASING: update instructions to use meson instead of autotools
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 12:57 PM Emil Velikov wrote: > > On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 at 17:42, Eric Engestrom wrote: > > > > On Thursday, 2018-12-20 11:53:11 -0800, Dylan Baker wrote: > > > Quoting Eric Engestrom (2018-12-19 08:23:40) > > > > Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom > > > > --- > > > > RELEASING | 27 --- > > > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/RELEASING b/RELEASING > > > > index 7e03e3b9acb1cbfb261a..d1ad8e3b4ad16d4ca14f 100644 > > > > --- a/RELEASING > > > > +++ b/RELEASING > > > > @@ -9,25 +9,14 @@ However, this is up to whoever is driving the feature > > > > in question. > > > > > > > > Follow these steps to release a new version of libdrm: > > > > > > > > - 1) Bump the version number in configure.ac and meson.build. We seem > > > > - to have settled for 2.4.x as the versioning scheme for libdrm, so > > > > - just bump the micro version. > > > > - > > > > - 2) Run autoconf and then re-run ./configure so the build system > > > > - picks up the new version number. > > > > - > > > > - 3) Verify that the code passes "make distcheck". Running "make > > > > - distcheck" should result in no warnings or errors and end with a > > > > - message of the form: > > > > - > > > > - = > > > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z archives ready for distribution: > > > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z.tar.gz > > > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z.tar.bz2 > > > > - = > > > > - > > > > - Make sure that the version number reported by distcheck and in > > > > - the tarball names matches the number you bumped to in > > > > configure.ac. > > > > + 1) Bump the version number in meson.build. We seem to have settled > > > > for > > > > + 2.4.x as the versioning scheme for libdrm, so just bump the micro > > > > + version. > > > > + > > > > + 2) Run `ninja -C builddir/ dist` to generate the tarballs. > > > > + Make sure that the version number of the tarball name in > > > > + builddir/meson-dist/ matches the number you bumped to. Move that > > > > + tarball to the libdrm repo root for the release script to pick up. > > > > > > > >4) Push the updated master branch with the bumped version number: > > > > Just noticed I forgot to decrement item 4 & 5 :] > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Cheers, > > > > Eric > > > > > > > > > > Acked-by: Dylan Baker > > > > > > But you should probably get someone other than just me to look at this. > > > > There is no "libdrm maintainer", which makes everyone a libdrm > > maintainer :] > > > > If nobody object, I'll push this in a few weeks (there's really no rush, > > but I want to make that move at some point, we have no reason to stay > > dependant on autotools now that we have better tools). > > Must admit I'm not the biggest fan. I can see this being cool for the > maintainer, if autotools was was present on their system. > The unfortunate reality is - it's there for the foreseeable future. > If anything it makes it more annoying for those using autotools/make - > regardless if they like doing so or not. > > So that's a nack from me :-\ Not really following what's the downside is of using meson to cut the release tarball? Resulting tarball should still be able to build fine with automake. If the concern is that automake will bitrot, then I think a much better solution is to add a few automake targets to the gitlab ci autobuilder stuff. That's what we've done for igt at least, works neatly. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: [PATCH libdrm] RELEASING: update instructions to use meson instead of autotools
On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 at 17:42, Eric Engestrom wrote: > > On Thursday, 2018-12-20 11:53:11 -0800, Dylan Baker wrote: > > Quoting Eric Engestrom (2018-12-19 08:23:40) > > > Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom > > > --- > > > RELEASING | 27 --- > > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/RELEASING b/RELEASING > > > index 7e03e3b9acb1cbfb261a..d1ad8e3b4ad16d4ca14f 100644 > > > --- a/RELEASING > > > +++ b/RELEASING > > > @@ -9,25 +9,14 @@ However, this is up to whoever is driving the feature > > > in question. > > > > > > Follow these steps to release a new version of libdrm: > > > > > > - 1) Bump the version number in configure.ac and meson.build. We seem > > > - to have settled for 2.4.x as the versioning scheme for libdrm, so > > > - just bump the micro version. > > > - > > > - 2) Run autoconf and then re-run ./configure so the build system > > > - picks up the new version number. > > > - > > > - 3) Verify that the code passes "make distcheck". Running "make > > > - distcheck" should result in no warnings or errors and end with a > > > - message of the form: > > > - > > > - = > > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z archives ready for distribution: > > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z.tar.gz > > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z.tar.bz2 > > > - = > > > - > > > - Make sure that the version number reported by distcheck and in > > > - the tarball names matches the number you bumped to in configure.ac. > > > + 1) Bump the version number in meson.build. We seem to have settled for > > > + 2.4.x as the versioning scheme for libdrm, so just bump the micro > > > + version. > > > + > > > + 2) Run `ninja -C builddir/ dist` to generate the tarballs. > > > + Make sure that the version number of the tarball name in > > > + builddir/meson-dist/ matches the number you bumped to. Move that > > > + tarball to the libdrm repo root for the release script to pick up. > > > > > >4) Push the updated master branch with the bumped version number: > > Just noticed I forgot to decrement item 4 & 5 :] > > > > > > > -- > > > Cheers, > > > Eric > > > > > > > Acked-by: Dylan Baker > > > > But you should probably get someone other than just me to look at this. > > There is no "libdrm maintainer", which makes everyone a libdrm > maintainer :] > > If nobody object, I'll push this in a few weeks (there's really no rush, > but I want to make that move at some point, we have no reason to stay > dependant on autotools now that we have better tools). Must admit I'm not the biggest fan. I can see this being cool for the maintainer, if autotools was was present on their system. The unfortunate reality is - it's there for the foreseeable future. If anything it makes it more annoying for those using autotools/make - regardless if they like doing so or not. So that's a nack from me :-\ -Emil ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: [PATCH libdrm] RELEASING: update instructions to use meson instead of autotools
On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 05:42:38PM +, Eric Engestrom wrote: > On Thursday, 2018-12-20 11:53:11 -0800, Dylan Baker wrote: > > Quoting Eric Engestrom (2018-12-19 08:23:40) > > > Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom > > > --- > > > RELEASING | 27 --- > > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/RELEASING b/RELEASING > > > index 7e03e3b9acb1cbfb261a..d1ad8e3b4ad16d4ca14f 100644 > > > --- a/RELEASING > > > +++ b/RELEASING > > > @@ -9,25 +9,14 @@ However, this is up to whoever is driving the feature > > > in question. > > > > > > Follow these steps to release a new version of libdrm: > > > > > > - 1) Bump the version number in configure.ac and meson.build. We seem > > > - to have settled for 2.4.x as the versioning scheme for libdrm, so > > > - just bump the micro version. > > > - > > > - 2) Run autoconf and then re-run ./configure so the build system > > > - picks up the new version number. > > > - > > > - 3) Verify that the code passes "make distcheck". Running "make > > > - distcheck" should result in no warnings or errors and end with a > > > - message of the form: > > > - > > > - = > > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z archives ready for distribution: > > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z.tar.gz > > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z.tar.bz2 > > > - = > > > - > > > - Make sure that the version number reported by distcheck and in > > > - the tarball names matches the number you bumped to in configure.ac. > > > + 1) Bump the version number in meson.build. We seem to have settled for > > > + 2.4.x as the versioning scheme for libdrm, so just bump the micro > > > + version. > > > + > > > + 2) Run `ninja -C builddir/ dist` to generate the tarballs. > > > + Make sure that the version number of the tarball name in > > > + builddir/meson-dist/ matches the number you bumped to. Move that > > > + tarball to the libdrm repo root for the release script to pick up. > > > > > >4) Push the updated master branch with the bumped version number: > > Just noticed I forgot to decrement item 4 & 5 :] > > > > > > > -- > > > Cheers, > > > Eric > > > > > > > Acked-by: Dylan Baker > > > > But you should probably get someone other than just me to look at this. > > There is no "libdrm maintainer", which makes everyone a libdrm > maintainer :] > > If nobody object, I'll push this in a few weeks (there's really no rush, > but I want to make that move at some point, we have no reason to stay > dependant on autotools now that we have better tools). I double-checked that ninja dist does run the tests, so lgtm (with the numbering adjusted): Acked-by: Daniel Vetter > ___ > dri-devel mailing list > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: [PATCH libdrm] RELEASING: update instructions to use meson instead of autotools
On Thursday, 2018-12-20 11:53:11 -0800, Dylan Baker wrote: > Quoting Eric Engestrom (2018-12-19 08:23:40) > > Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom > > --- > > RELEASING | 27 --- > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/RELEASING b/RELEASING > > index 7e03e3b9acb1cbfb261a..d1ad8e3b4ad16d4ca14f 100644 > > --- a/RELEASING > > +++ b/RELEASING > > @@ -9,25 +9,14 @@ However, this is up to whoever is driving the feature in > > question. > > > > Follow these steps to release a new version of libdrm: > > > > - 1) Bump the version number in configure.ac and meson.build. We seem > > - to have settled for 2.4.x as the versioning scheme for libdrm, so > > - just bump the micro version. > > - > > - 2) Run autoconf and then re-run ./configure so the build system > > - picks up the new version number. > > - > > - 3) Verify that the code passes "make distcheck". Running "make > > - distcheck" should result in no warnings or errors and end with a > > - message of the form: > > - > > - = > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z archives ready for distribution: > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z.tar.gz > > - libdrm-X.Y.Z.tar.bz2 > > - = > > - > > - Make sure that the version number reported by distcheck and in > > - the tarball names matches the number you bumped to in configure.ac. > > + 1) Bump the version number in meson.build. We seem to have settled for > > + 2.4.x as the versioning scheme for libdrm, so just bump the micro > > + version. > > + > > + 2) Run `ninja -C builddir/ dist` to generate the tarballs. > > + Make sure that the version number of the tarball name in > > + builddir/meson-dist/ matches the number you bumped to. Move that > > + tarball to the libdrm repo root for the release script to pick up. > > > >4) Push the updated master branch with the bumped version number: Just noticed I forgot to decrement item 4 & 5 :] > > > > -- > > Cheers, > > Eric > > > > Acked-by: Dylan Baker > > But you should probably get someone other than just me to look at this. There is no "libdrm maintainer", which makes everyone a libdrm maintainer :] If nobody object, I'll push this in a few weeks (there's really no rush, but I want to make that move at some point, we have no reason to stay dependant on autotools now that we have better tools). ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: [PATCH libdrm] RELEASING: update instructions to use meson instead of autotools
Quoting Eric Engestrom (2018-12-19 08:23:40) > Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom > --- > RELEASING | 27 --- > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/RELEASING b/RELEASING > index 7e03e3b9acb1cbfb261a..d1ad8e3b4ad16d4ca14f 100644 > --- a/RELEASING > +++ b/RELEASING > @@ -9,25 +9,14 @@ However, this is up to whoever is driving the feature in > question. > > Follow these steps to release a new version of libdrm: > > - 1) Bump the version number in configure.ac and meson.build. We seem > - to have settled for 2.4.x as the versioning scheme for libdrm, so > - just bump the micro version. > - > - 2) Run autoconf and then re-run ./configure so the build system > - picks up the new version number. > - > - 3) Verify that the code passes "make distcheck". Running "make > - distcheck" should result in no warnings or errors and end with a > - message of the form: > - > - = > - libdrm-X.Y.Z archives ready for distribution: > - libdrm-X.Y.Z.tar.gz > - libdrm-X.Y.Z.tar.bz2 > - = > - > - Make sure that the version number reported by distcheck and in > - the tarball names matches the number you bumped to in configure.ac. > + 1) Bump the version number in meson.build. We seem to have settled for > + 2.4.x as the versioning scheme for libdrm, so just bump the micro > + version. > + > + 2) Run `ninja -C builddir/ dist` to generate the tarballs. > + Make sure that the version number of the tarball name in > + builddir/meson-dist/ matches the number you bumped to. Move that > + tarball to the libdrm repo root for the release script to pick up. > >4) Push the updated master branch with the bumped version number: > > -- > Cheers, > Eric > Acked-by: Dylan Baker But you should probably get someone other than just me to look at this. signature.asc Description: signature ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
