Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Jonathan Gray]

On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 05:05:41PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 3:56 PM Jonathan Gray  wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 03:46:35PM +0200, Eero Tamminen wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On 13.1.2019 9.44, Jonathan Gray wrote:
> > > ...> As we can not depend on python to build Mesa in OpenBSD I will have 
> > > to
> > > > go back to maintaining a local Mesa build system if autotools is 
> > > > removed.
> > >
> > > Mesa already needs python-mako (for code generation) with Autotools.
> > > Why Meson also needing Python is a problem?
> >
> > Python generated files can be generated per release to not depend on
> > python at build time.
> >
> > All of the files generated by python used in a build of Mesa on OpenBSD are
> > already included in Mesa tarballs except for egd_tables.h
> >
> > https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103911
> 
> is pre-generating the ninja build files that meson generates an
> option?  (I assume that the generated ninja ends up not being portable
> across different build environments, but maybe for OpenBSD the build
> environment is uniform enough??  idk, just a thought)

I suspect the build files meson/ninja generates would not be portable
across architectures with different toolchains but have not looked.

> 
> Anyways, a lot of other projects have been switching to meson, I guess
> OpenBSD will have to figure out how to deal getting python into build
> tree sooner or later, right?

OpenBSD is split into three repositories, src which contains the kernel,
libc, libssl, posix userland, toolchains (llvm, gcc, binutils) etc. 
xenocara which is the xserver, Mesa, xorg drivers, fonts etc and ports.

The src and xenocara trees are self contained and include all dependencies.
ports are makefiles which describe how to fetch sources and patches to
build binary packages.

meson is in ports and is used to build gnome and related parts but can
not be used in src or xenocara trees.  Python will not be imported into
src.  Either a c/perl implementation of meson is needed or a make based
build system from the OpenBSD perspective.

If Makefile.sources remains after autoconf goes I could use that as part
of a locally maintained not upstreamed make based build system.
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Rob Clark]

On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 3:56 PM Jonathan Gray  wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 03:46:35PM +0200, Eero Tamminen wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 13.1.2019 9.44, Jonathan Gray wrote:
> > ...> As we can not depend on python to build Mesa in OpenBSD I will have to
> > > go back to maintaining a local Mesa build system if autotools is removed.
> >
> > Mesa already needs python-mako (for code generation) with Autotools.
> > Why Meson also needing Python is a problem?
>
> Python generated files can be generated per release to not depend on
> python at build time.
>
> All of the files generated by python used in a build of Mesa on OpenBSD are
> already included in Mesa tarballs except for egd_tables.h
>
> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103911

is pre-generating the ninja build files that meson generates an
option?  (I assume that the generated ninja ends up not being portable
across different build environments, but maybe for OpenBSD the build
environment is uniform enough??  idk, just a thought)

Anyways, a lot of other projects have been switching to meson, I guess
OpenBSD will have to figure out how to deal getting python into build
tree sooner or later, right?

BR,
-R
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Jonathan Gray]

On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 03:46:35PM +0200, Eero Tamminen wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 13.1.2019 9.44, Jonathan Gray wrote:
> ...> As we can not depend on python to build Mesa in OpenBSD I will have to
> > go back to maintaining a local Mesa build system if autotools is removed.
> 
> Mesa already needs python-mako (for code generation) with Autotools.
> Why Meson also needing Python is a problem?

Python generated files can be generated per release to not depend on
python at build time.

All of the files generated by python used in a build of Mesa on OpenBSD are
already included in Mesa tarballs except for egd_tables.h

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103911
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Matt Turner]

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 2:11 PM Matt Turner  wrote:
>
> From: Gert Wollny 
>
> Since Meson will eventually be the only build system deprecate autotools
> now. It can still be used by invoking configure with the flag
>   --enable-autotools
>
> NAKed-by: Ilia Mirkin 
> Acked-by: Eric Engestrom 
> Acked-by: Kenneth Graunke 
> Acked-by: Lionel Landwerlin 
> Acked-by: Jason Ekstrand 
> Acked-by: Rob Clark 
> Acked-by: Marek Olšák 
> Reviewed-by: Christian Gmeiner 
> Reviewed-by: Matt Turner 
> Reviewed-by: Eric Anholt 
> Signed-off-by: Gert Wollny 
> ---

Now upstream as commit e68777c87ceed02ab199b32f941778c3cf97c794.
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Eric Engestrom]

On Saturday, 2019-01-12 13:24:38 -0500, Ilia Mirkin wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 9:40 AM Gert Wollny  wrote:
> > I will not push it with
> > the strong NAK you gave, Ilia. To me consensus means that all who
> > contribute significantly to the project (like you certainly do) agree
> > or abstain, but don't object.
> 
> A single actor should not prevent a group from adopting something he
> doesn't like. Given that I had all the (in my consideration) major
> issues that I did, I assumed that some others had run into them as
> well and were equally (or at least partially) concerned. It seems like
> that theory has not been borne out -- while I did get some private
> feedback about this, no one seems to be publicly willing expend
> political capital on this issue.
> 
> Perhaps my workflow is different, or perhaps my tolerance for BS is
> lower. Probably some combination... I build for 3 different
> cross-environments in addition to the native build (arm, arm64,
> ppc64), and even x86_32 on the rare occasion. It all works out OK, and
> I don't have to spend a ton of time remembering how each one works in
> the intervening 6-12 months between each occasion that I spend time on
> a particular platform. I suspect the majority of people just build one
> thing and it's no trouble to remember how it works since you're doing
> it every day.
> 
> A switch to meson will require a re-investment of time into figuring
> out how to make those various cases work properly, and all the issues
> I ran into with meson (no-longer-working build dirs, inability to
> retrieve configuration args, etc)

Just FYI, the former was fixed in 0.49, as in meson will now automatically
re-configure itself if need be, which means `meson configure` to see the
current configuration always works now, but they also added the ability
to see every option that has been set by dumping the contents of
$builddir/meson-private/cmd_line.txt

I think there's ongoing work to add something to meson to print it in
a way that can be fed back to meson, but in the mean time Dylan added
a script in 4a131a13303773d8b0e4 (./bin/meson-cmd-extract.py) that you
can point to a meson build dir to print its configuration in a way that
you can directly use to configure another meson builddir with the same
settings.

> conspire to require that
> reinvestment to happen each time rather than once-per-lifetime. But
> perhaps these will be fixed by then? Let's hope.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
>   -ilia
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Eero Tamminen]

Hi,

On 13.1.2019 9.44, Jonathan Gray wrote:
...> As we can not depend on python to build Mesa in OpenBSD I will have to

go back to maintaining a local Mesa build system if autotools is removed.


Mesa already needs python-mako (for code generation) with Autotools.
Why Meson also needing Python is a problem?


- Eero
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Lionel Landwerlin]

On 12/01/2019 18:24, Ilia Mirkin wrote:

On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 9:40 AM Gert Wollny  wrote:

I will not push it with
the strong NAK you gave, Ilia. To me consensus means that all who
contribute significantly to the project (like you certainly do) agree
or abstain, but don't object.

A single actor should not prevent a group from adopting something he
doesn't like. Given that I had all the (in my consideration) major
issues that I did, I assumed that some others had run into them as
well and were equally (or at least partially) concerned. It seems like
that theory has not been borne out -- while I did get some private
feedback about this, no one seems to be publicly willing expend
political capital on this issue.

Perhaps my workflow is different, or perhaps my tolerance for BS is
lower. Probably some combination... I build for 3 different
cross-environments in addition to the native build (arm, arm64,
ppc64), and even x86_32 on the rare occasion. It all works out OK, and
I don't have to spend a ton of time remembering how each one works in
the intervening 6-12 months between each occasion that I spend time on
a particular platform. I suspect the majority of people just build one
thing and it's no trouble to remember how it works since you're doing
it every day.



Just throwing my 2 cents on cross compiling stuff :

For gputop (https://github.com/rib/gputop) I'm cross compiling C/C++ to 
javascript using emscripten.


Apart from figuring out the couple of entries in the cross compile meson 
files, I didn't run into any issue.


So hopefully it won't be more 20mn for you.


-Lionel



A switch to meson will require a re-investment of time into figuring
out how to make those various cases work properly, and all the issues
I ran into with meson (no-longer-working build dirs, inability to
retrieve configuration args, etc) conspire to require that
reinvestment to happen each time rather than once-per-lifetime. But
perhaps these will be fixed by then? Let's hope.

Cheers,

   -ilia
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev



___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Jonathan Gray]

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 02:11:28PM -0800, Matt Turner wrote:
> From: Gert Wollny 
> 
> Since Meson will eventually be the only build system deprecate autotools
> now. It can still be used by invoking configure with the flag
>   --enable-autotools
> 
> NAKed-by: Ilia Mirkin 
> Acked-by: Eric Engestrom 
> Acked-by: Kenneth Graunke 
> Acked-by: Lionel Landwerlin 
> Acked-by: Jason Ekstrand 
> Acked-by: Rob Clark 
> Acked-by: Marek Olk 
> Reviewed-by: Christian Gmeiner 
> Reviewed-by: Matt Turner 
> Reviewed-by: Eric Anholt 
> Signed-off-by: Gert Wollny 
> ---
> I think there's support for overriding the sole objection to this patch.
> 
> To confirm:
> 
> (1) The plan is to remove Autotools, perhaps after the 19.0 release
> 
> (2) This patch's purpose is to ensure that everyone knows that
> Autotools will be going away (think: people who build Mesa as
> part of an automated process and wouldn't notice a deprecation
>   warning unless it requires some action from them)
> 
> (3) We expect all reasonable concerns about Meson to be resolved
> before Autotools is removed (e.g., reconfiguration problems,
>   retrieving configuration command line, configuration status
>   output, etc.)

As we can not depend on python to build Mesa in OpenBSD I will have to
go back to maintaining a local Mesa build system if autotools is removed.

If you are looking for feedback from distributions you should also
mention this on the mesa-maintainers list.

> 
>  configure.ac | 13 +
>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
> index e4d20054d5f..c7473d77eff 100644
> --- a/configure.ac
> +++ b/configure.ac
> @@ -52,6 +52,19 @@ mingw*)
>  ;;
>  esac
>  
> +AC_ARG_ENABLE(autotools,
> +   [AS_HELP_STRING([--enable-autotools],
> +   [Enable the use of this autotools based build 
> configuration])],
> +   [enable_autotools=$enableval], [enable_autotools=no])
> +
> +if test "x$enable_autotools" != "xyes" ; then
> +AC_MSG_ERROR([the autotools build system has been deprecated in favour of
> +meson and will be removed eventually. For instructions on how to use 
> meson
> +see https://www.mesa3d.org/meson.html.
> +If you still want to use the autotools build, then add --enable-autotools
> +to the configure command line.])
> +fi
> +
>  # Support silent build rules, requires at least automake-1.11. Disable
>  # by either passing --disable-silent-rules to configure or passing V=1
>  # to make
> -- 
> 2.19.2
> 
> ___
> mesa-dev mailing list
> mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Ilia Mirkin]

On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 9:40 AM Gert Wollny  wrote:
> I will not push it with
> the strong NAK you gave, Ilia. To me consensus means that all who
> contribute significantly to the project (like you certainly do) agree
> or abstain, but don't object.

A single actor should not prevent a group from adopting something he
doesn't like. Given that I had all the (in my consideration) major
issues that I did, I assumed that some others had run into them as
well and were equally (or at least partially) concerned. It seems like
that theory has not been borne out -- while I did get some private
feedback about this, no one seems to be publicly willing expend
political capital on this issue.

Perhaps my workflow is different, or perhaps my tolerance for BS is
lower. Probably some combination... I build for 3 different
cross-environments in addition to the native build (arm, arm64,
ppc64), and even x86_32 on the rare occasion. It all works out OK, and
I don't have to spend a ton of time remembering how each one works in
the intervening 6-12 months between each occasion that I spend time on
a particular platform. I suspect the majority of people just build one
thing and it's no trouble to remember how it works since you're doing
it every day.

A switch to meson will require a re-investment of time into figuring
out how to make those various cases work properly, and all the issues
I ran into with meson (no-longer-working build dirs, inability to
retrieve configuration args, etc) conspire to require that
reinvestment to happen each time rather than once-per-lifetime. But
perhaps these will be fixed by then? Let's hope.

Cheers,

  -ilia
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Jason Ekstrand]

On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 4:03 AM Jose Fonseca  wrote:

> On 11/01/2019 22:38, Matt Turner wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 2:28 PM Ilia Mirkin 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 5:12 PM Matt Turner  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> From: Gert Wollny 
> >>>
> >>> Since Meson will eventually be the only build system deprecate
> autotools
> >>> now. It can still be used by invoking configure with the flag
> >>>--enable-autotools
> >>>
> >>> NAKed-by: Ilia Mirkin 
> >>
> >> [nouveau]
> >>
> >>> Acked-by: Eric Engestrom 
> >>> Acked-by: Kenneth Graunke 
> >>> Acked-by: Lionel Landwerlin 
> >>> Acked-by: Jason Ekstrand 
> >>> Reviewed-by: Matt Turner 
> >>
> >> [intel]
> >>
> >>> Acked-by: Rob Clark 
> >>
> >> [freedreno]
> >>
> >>> Acked-by: Marek Olšák 
> >>
> >> [radeon]
> >>
> >>> Reviewed-by: Christian Gmeiner 
> >>
> >> [etnaviv]
> >>
> >>> Reviewed-by: Eric Anholt 
> >>
> >> [vc4]
> >>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Gert Wollny 
> >>
> >> [sorry Gert, not sure how to classify you]
> >>
> >> I think the vmware team (which largely maintains llvmpipe and svga) is
> >> probably worth hearing from -- I believe they've largely stayed out of
> >> it. But an ack/nack would be good. Also virgl isn't represented, I
> >> believe. Probably not *required* to hear from these, but perhaps worth
> >> a poke?
> >
> > Sure. I've Cc'd Dave, Brian, José, and Roland on this reply.
>
> Thanks for letting us know.  No concerns for my part FWIW, though my
> involvement on Mesa has been minimal lately.  I think for some of my
> colleagues might be different, but I've been using SCons almost
> exclusively for a very long time, so autotools removal doesn't affect me.
>
> autotools could never become "the build the system to rule them all", in
> Mesa-land, due to the lack of Windows, but there's at least hope Meson
> might one day become it.
>
> For the time where SCons is still around, I wonder if there's value in
> keeping Makefile.sources, or we should just fold them into SConscripts?
> Because they add complexity to SCons which now makes little point,
> unless there's some way to share source file lists between SCons and Meson?
>

As long as we're carrying both Android and SCons, having Makefile.sources
remains useful.
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Brian Paul]

> On Jan 12, 2019, at 8:07 AM, Roland Scheidegger  wrote:
> 
>> Am 11.01.19 um 23:28 schrieb Ilia Mirkin:
>>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 5:12 PM Matt Turner  wrote:
>>> 
>>> From: Gert Wollny 
>>> 
>>> Since Meson will eventually be the only build system deprecate autotools
>>> now. It can still be used by invoking configure with the flag
>>>  --enable-autotools
>>> 
>>> NAKed-by: Ilia Mirkin 
>> 
>> [nouveau]
>> 
>>> Acked-by: Eric Engestrom 
>>> Acked-by: Kenneth Graunke 
>>> Acked-by: Lionel Landwerlin 
>>> Acked-by: Jason Ekstrand 
>>> Reviewed-by: Matt Turner 
>> 
>> [intel]
>> 
>>> Acked-by: Rob Clark 
>> 
>> [freedreno]
>> 
>>> Acked-by: Marek Olšák 
>> 
>> [radeon]
>> 
>>> Reviewed-by: Christian Gmeiner 
>> 
>> [etnaviv]
>> 
>>> Reviewed-by: Eric Anholt 
>> 
>> [vc4]
>> 
>>> Signed-off-by: Gert Wollny 
>> 
>> [sorry Gert, not sure how to classify you]
>> 
>> I think the vmware team (which largely maintains llvmpipe and svga) is
>> probably worth hearing from -- I believe they've largely stayed out of
>> it. But an ack/nack would be good. Also virgl isn't represented, I
>> believe. Probably not *required* to hear from these, but perhaps worth
>> a poke?
> 
> I don't think we actually use autotools anywhere (we use scons)
> officially, so I don't think we have any objections to deprecate
> autotools. Though at some point we should probably adopt meson too...

I’ve never been a fan of autotools so I’m glad to see it go.

I added meson support to our internal Linux build script some time ago and it 
seems fine. For Windows we still rely on scons.

I’ve been pretty focused on non-Mesa work for a while but testing meson on 
Windows (and mingw) is on my radar.  Retiring scons will be some work because 
of integration issues with our VMware build infrastructure for Windows. I think 
we’d all like to get to having one build system eventually though. 

-Brian

___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Roland Scheidegger]

Am 11.01.19 um 23:28 schrieb Ilia Mirkin:
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 5:12 PM Matt Turner  wrote:
>>
>> From: Gert Wollny 
>>
>> Since Meson will eventually be the only build system deprecate autotools
>> now. It can still be used by invoking configure with the flag
>>   --enable-autotools
>>
>> NAKed-by: Ilia Mirkin 
> 
> [nouveau]
> 
>> Acked-by: Eric Engestrom 
>> Acked-by: Kenneth Graunke 
>> Acked-by: Lionel Landwerlin 
>> Acked-by: Jason Ekstrand 
>> Reviewed-by: Matt Turner 
> 
> [intel]
> 
>> Acked-by: Rob Clark 
> 
> [freedreno]
> 
>> Acked-by: Marek Olšák 
> 
> [radeon]
> 
>> Reviewed-by: Christian Gmeiner 
> 
> [etnaviv]
> 
>> Reviewed-by: Eric Anholt 
> 
> [vc4]
> 
>> Signed-off-by: Gert Wollny 
> 
> [sorry Gert, not sure how to classify you]
> 
> I think the vmware team (which largely maintains llvmpipe and svga) is
> probably worth hearing from -- I believe they've largely stayed out of
> it. But an ack/nack would be good. Also virgl isn't represented, I
> believe. Probably not *required* to hear from these, but perhaps worth
> a poke?

I don't think we actually use autotools anywhere (we use scons)
officially, so I don't think we have any objections to deprecate
autotools. Though at some point we should probably adopt meson too...

Roland

> 
>> ---
>> I think there's support for overriding the sole objection to this patch.
>>
>> To confirm:
>>
>> (1) The plan is to remove Autotools, perhaps after the 19.0 release
>>
>> (2) This patch's purpose is to ensure that everyone knows that
>> Autotools will be going away (think: people who build Mesa as
>> part of an automated process and wouldn't notice a deprecation
>> warning unless it requires some action from them)
> 
> If it's being removed _after_ the 19.0 release, does it make sense to
> have a patch like this _in_ the 19.0 release? (Perhaps the answer is
> `yes', but I'd still like to ask the question.)
> 
>>
>> (3) We expect all reasonable concerns about Meson to be resolved
>> before Autotools is removed (e.g., reconfiguration problems,
>> retrieving configuration command line, configuration status
>> output, etc.)
>>
>>  configure.ac | 13 +
>>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
>> index e4d20054d5f..c7473d77eff 100644
>> --- a/configure.ac
>> +++ b/configure.ac
>> @@ -52,6 +52,19 @@ mingw*)
>>  ;;
>>  esac
>>
>> +AC_ARG_ENABLE(autotools,
>> +   [AS_HELP_STRING([--enable-autotools],
>> +   [Enable the use of this autotools based build 
>> configuration])],
>> +   [enable_autotools=$enableval], [enable_autotools=no])
>> +
>> +if test "x$enable_autotools" != "xyes" ; then
>> +AC_MSG_ERROR([the autotools build system has been deprecated in favour 
>> of
>> +meson and will be removed eventually. For instructions on how to use 
>> meson
>> +see 
>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mesa3d.org%2Fmeson.htmldata=02%7C01%7Csroland%40vmware.com%7C6318bcef4bb8448c161808d678142d0c%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C636828425410064737sdata=LPbkdwrhgg2lC%2FNDJl54GbV5DSQtM6YWu16g68IGEME%3Dreserved=0.
>> +If you still want to use the autotools build, then add 
>> --enable-autotools
>> +to the configure command line.])
>> +fi
>> +
>>  # Support silent build rules, requires at least automake-1.11. Disable
>>  # by either passing --disable-silent-rules to configure or passing V=1
>>  # to make
>> --
>> 2.19.2
>>
>> ___
>> mesa-dev mailing list
>> mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.freedesktop.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fmesa-devdata=02%7C01%7Csroland%40vmware.com%7C6318bcef4bb8448c161808d678142d0c%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C636828425410064737sdata=xuss8y2JSxq4Tlzz4JRppDaP9Kze5r8k8RbLpJnixIo%3Dreserved=0
> ___
> mesa-dev mailing list
> mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.freedesktop.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fmesa-devdata=02%7C01%7Csroland%40vmware.com%7C6318bcef4bb8448c161808d678142d0c%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C636828425410064737sdata=xuss8y2JSxq4Tlzz4JRppDaP9Kze5r8k8RbLpJnixIo%3Dreserved=0
> 

___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Gert Wollny]

Am Freitag, den 11.01.2019, 17:28 -0500 schrieb Ilia Mirkin:
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 5:12 PM Matt Turner 
> wrote:
> > 
> [sorry Gert, not sure how to classify you]
> 
> I think the vmware team (which largely maintains llvmpipe and svga)
> is probably worth hearing from -- I believe they've largely stayed
> out of it. But an ack/nack would be good. Also virgl isn't
> represented, I believe.

Dave gave some comments some time ago about issues he had with meson (
put him in CC). I'm also contributing to virgl, but this patch I didn't
sign as Collaboran because this is more about my personal opinion that
the removal of autotools without prior deprecation doesn't seem to me
to be a good idea.

I'm happy, btw, that all those in favour of removing autotools sooner
than later went this step in my direction and have acknowledged this
patch (and thanks to all the others too), but I will not push it with
the strong NAK you gave, Ilia. To me consensus means that all who
contribute significantly to the project (like you certainly do) agree
or abstain, but don't object.

Best,
Gert


> 
> > ---
> > I think there's support for overriding the sole objection to this
> > patch.
> > 
> > To confirm:
> > 
> > (1) The plan is to remove Autotools, perhaps after the 19.0
> > release
> > 
> > (2) This patch's purpose is to ensure that everyone knows that
> > Autotools will be going away (think: people who build Mesa
> > as
> > part of an automated process and wouldn't notice a
> > deprecation
> > warning unless it requires some action from them)
> 
> If it's being removed _after_ the 19.0 release, does it make sense to
> have a patch like this _in_ the 19.0 release? (Perhaps the answer is
> `yes', but I'd still like to ask the question.)
> 
> > 
> > (3) We expect all reasonable concerns about Meson to be
> > resolved
> > before Autotools is removed (e.g., reconfiguration
> > problems,
> > retrieving configuration command line, configuration status
> > output, etc.)
> > 
> >  configure.ac | 13 +
> >  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
> > index e4d20054d5f..c7473d77eff 100644
> > --- a/configure.ac
> > +++ b/configure.ac
> > @@ -52,6 +52,19 @@ mingw*)
> >  ;;
> >  esac
> > 
> > +AC_ARG_ENABLE(autotools,
> > +   [AS_HELP_STRING([--enable-autotools],
> > +   [Enable the use of this autotools based build
> > configuration])],
> > +   [enable_autotools=$enableval], [enable_autotools=no])
> > +
> > +if test "x$enable_autotools" != "xyes" ; then
> > +AC_MSG_ERROR([the autotools build system has been deprecated
> > in favour of
> > +meson and will be removed eventually. For instructions on how
> > to use meson
> > +see https://www.mesa3d.org/meson.html.
> > +If you still want to use the autotools build, then add --
> > enable-autotools
> > +to the configure command line.])
> > +fi
> > +
> >  # Support silent build rules, requires at least automake-1.11.
> > Disable
> >  # by either passing --disable-silent-rules to configure or passing
> > V=1
> >  # to make
> > --
> > 2.19.2
> > 
> > ___
> > mesa-dev mailing list
> > mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
> > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Jose Fonseca]

On 11/01/2019 22:38, Matt Turner wrote:

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 2:28 PM Ilia Mirkin  wrote:


On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 5:12 PM Matt Turner  wrote:


From: Gert Wollny 

Since Meson will eventually be the only build system deprecate autotools
now. It can still be used by invoking configure with the flag
   --enable-autotools

NAKed-by: Ilia Mirkin 


[nouveau]


Acked-by: Eric Engestrom 
Acked-by: Kenneth Graunke 
Acked-by: Lionel Landwerlin 
Acked-by: Jason Ekstrand 
Reviewed-by: Matt Turner 


[intel]


Acked-by: Rob Clark 


[freedreno]


Acked-by: Marek Olšák 


[radeon]


Reviewed-by: Christian Gmeiner 


[etnaviv]


Reviewed-by: Eric Anholt 


[vc4]


Signed-off-by: Gert Wollny 


[sorry Gert, not sure how to classify you]

I think the vmware team (which largely maintains llvmpipe and svga) is
probably worth hearing from -- I believe they've largely stayed out of
it. But an ack/nack would be good. Also virgl isn't represented, I
believe. Probably not *required* to hear from these, but perhaps worth
a poke?


Sure. I've Cc'd Dave, Brian, José, and Roland on this reply.


Thanks for letting us know.  No concerns for my part FWIW, though my 
involvement on Mesa has been minimal lately.  I think for some of my 
colleagues might be different, but I've been using SCons almost 
exclusively for a very long time, so autotools removal doesn't affect me.


autotools could never become "the build the system to rule them all", in 
Mesa-land, due to the lack of Windows, but there's at least hope Meson 
might one day become it.


For the time where SCons is still around, I wonder if there's value in 
keeping Makefile.sources, or we should just fold them into SConscripts? 
Because they add complexity to SCons which now makes little point, 
unless there's some way to share source file lists between SCons and Meson?


Jose
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Dylan Baker]

Quoting Ilia Mirkin (2019-01-11 14:43:26)
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 5:38 PM Matt Turner  wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 2:28 PM Ilia Mirkin  wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 5:12 PM Matt Turner  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > From: Gert Wollny 
> > > >
> > > > Since Meson will eventually be the only build system deprecate autotools
> > > > now. It can still be used by invoking configure with the flag
> > > >   --enable-autotools
> > > >
> > > > NAKed-by: Ilia Mirkin 
> > >
> > > [nouveau]
> > >
> > > > Acked-by: Eric Engestrom 
> > > > Acked-by: Kenneth Graunke 
> > > > Acked-by: Lionel Landwerlin 
> > > > Acked-by: Jason Ekstrand 
> > > > Reviewed-by: Matt Turner 
> > >
> > > [intel]
> > >
> > > > Acked-by: Rob Clark 
> > >
> > > [freedreno]
> > >
> > > > Acked-by: Marek Olšák 
> > >
> > > [radeon]
> > >
> > > > Reviewed-by: Christian Gmeiner 
> > >
> > > [etnaviv]
> > >
> > > > Reviewed-by: Eric Anholt 
> > >
> > > [vc4]
> > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Gert Wollny 
> > >
> > > [sorry Gert, not sure how to classify you]
> > >
> > > I think the vmware team (which largely maintains llvmpipe and svga) is
> > > probably worth hearing from -- I believe they've largely stayed out of
> > > it. But an ack/nack would be good. Also virgl isn't represented, I
> > > believe. Probably not *required* to hear from these, but perhaps worth
> > > a poke?
> >
> > Sure. I've Cc'd Dave, Brian, José, and Roland on this reply.
> >
> > > > ---
> > > > I think there's support for overriding the sole objection to this patch.
> > > >
> > > > To confirm:
> > > >
> > > > (1) The plan is to remove Autotools, perhaps after the 19.0 release
> > > >
> > > > (2) This patch's purpose is to ensure that everyone knows that
> > > > Autotools will be going away (think: people who build Mesa as
> > > > part of an automated process and wouldn't notice a deprecation
> > > > warning unless it requires some action from them)
> > >
> > > If it's being removed _after_ the 19.0 release, does it make sense to
> > > have a patch like this _in_ the 19.0 release? (Perhaps the answer is
> > > `yes', but I'd still like to ask the question.)
> >
> > Yes, I think so -- I might be missing or misunderstanding a part of
> > your question though.
> >
> > My thinking is in 19.0 mark autotools as deprecated with this patch so
> > as to ensure everyone knows, and depending on progress on the blocking
> > issues to aim for removal after the 19.0 branch point.
> 
> Perhaps I was just responding (in my head) too literally to your
> comment about automated processes. If the automated process is around
> building HEAD, then it's not necessary for this change to be in the
> release. But I guess you also want to catch the people with automated
> processes against released versions who might have various
> hypothetical issues with meson, and you want them to report the issues
> while they still have an easy fallback to autotools, as opposed to
> when there's no other option and they're stuck in an inconvenient
> situation.
> 
> So ... the answer is `yes'.
> 
>   -ilia

Yes. In particular we'd like to make sure that distros know that we're planning
on changing the build system sometime after 19.0. Since many distro wrappers
only show you the config log if something goes wrong, they're unlikely to notice
a warning that autotools support is deprecated unless the build stops working.

Dylan


signature.asc
Description: signature
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Kristian Høgsberg]

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 2:28 PM Ilia Mirkin  wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 5:12 PM Matt Turner  wrote:
> >
> > From: Gert Wollny 
> >
> > Since Meson will eventually be the only build system deprecate autotools
> > now. It can still be used by invoking configure with the flag
> >   --enable-autotools
> >
> > NAKed-by: Ilia Mirkin 
>
> [nouveau]
>
> > Acked-by: Eric Engestrom 
> > Acked-by: Kenneth Graunke 
> > Acked-by: Lionel Landwerlin 
> > Acked-by: Jason Ekstrand 
> > Reviewed-by: Matt Turner 
>
> [intel]
>
> > Acked-by: Rob Clark 
>
> [freedreno]
>
> > Acked-by: Marek Olšák 
>
> [radeon]
>
> > Reviewed-by: Christian Gmeiner 
>
> [etnaviv]
>
> > Reviewed-by: Eric Anholt 
>
> [vc4]
>
> > Signed-off-by: Gert Wollny 
>
> [sorry Gert, not sure how to classify you]
>
> I think the vmware team (which largely maintains llvmpipe and svga) is
> probably worth hearing from -- I believe they've largely stayed out of
> it. But an ack/nack would be good. Also virgl isn't represented, I
> believe. Probably not *required* to hear from these, but perhaps worth
> a poke?

If we want to round up Ack/Nacks from distros, I can lead with an

Acked-by: Kristian H. Kristensen 

on behalf of chromeos.

> > ---
> > I think there's support for overriding the sole objection to this patch.
> >
> > To confirm:
> >
> > (1) The plan is to remove Autotools, perhaps after the 19.0 release
> >
> > (2) This patch's purpose is to ensure that everyone knows that
> > Autotools will be going away (think: people who build Mesa as
> > part of an automated process and wouldn't notice a deprecation
> > warning unless it requires some action from them)
>
> If it's being removed _after_ the 19.0 release, does it make sense to
> have a patch like this _in_ the 19.0 release? (Perhaps the answer is
> `yes', but I'd still like to ask the question.)
>
> >
> > (3) We expect all reasonable concerns about Meson to be resolved
> > before Autotools is removed (e.g., reconfiguration problems,
> > retrieving configuration command line, configuration status
> > output, etc.)
> >
> >  configure.ac | 13 +
> >  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
> > index e4d20054d5f..c7473d77eff 100644
> > --- a/configure.ac
> > +++ b/configure.ac
> > @@ -52,6 +52,19 @@ mingw*)
> >  ;;
> >  esac
> >
> > +AC_ARG_ENABLE(autotools,
> > +   [AS_HELP_STRING([--enable-autotools],
> > +   [Enable the use of this autotools based build 
> > configuration])],
> > +   [enable_autotools=$enableval], [enable_autotools=no])
> > +
> > +if test "x$enable_autotools" != "xyes" ; then
> > +AC_MSG_ERROR([the autotools build system has been deprecated in favour 
> > of
> > +meson and will be removed eventually. For instructions on how to use 
> > meson
> > +see https://www.mesa3d.org/meson.html.
> > +If you still want to use the autotools build, then add 
> > --enable-autotools
> > +to the configure command line.])
> > +fi
> > +
> >  # Support silent build rules, requires at least automake-1.11. Disable
> >  # by either passing --disable-silent-rules to configure or passing V=1
> >  # to make
> > --
> > 2.19.2
> >
> > ___
> > mesa-dev mailing list
> > mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
> > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
> ___
> mesa-dev mailing list
> mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Ilia Mirkin]

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 5:38 PM Matt Turner  wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 2:28 PM Ilia Mirkin  wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 5:12 PM Matt Turner  wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Gert Wollny 
> > >
> > > Since Meson will eventually be the only build system deprecate autotools
> > > now. It can still be used by invoking configure with the flag
> > >   --enable-autotools
> > >
> > > NAKed-by: Ilia Mirkin 
> >
> > [nouveau]
> >
> > > Acked-by: Eric Engestrom 
> > > Acked-by: Kenneth Graunke 
> > > Acked-by: Lionel Landwerlin 
> > > Acked-by: Jason Ekstrand 
> > > Reviewed-by: Matt Turner 
> >
> > [intel]
> >
> > > Acked-by: Rob Clark 
> >
> > [freedreno]
> >
> > > Acked-by: Marek Olšák 
> >
> > [radeon]
> >
> > > Reviewed-by: Christian Gmeiner 
> >
> > [etnaviv]
> >
> > > Reviewed-by: Eric Anholt 
> >
> > [vc4]
> >
> > > Signed-off-by: Gert Wollny 
> >
> > [sorry Gert, not sure how to classify you]
> >
> > I think the vmware team (which largely maintains llvmpipe and svga) is
> > probably worth hearing from -- I believe they've largely stayed out of
> > it. But an ack/nack would be good. Also virgl isn't represented, I
> > believe. Probably not *required* to hear from these, but perhaps worth
> > a poke?
>
> Sure. I've Cc'd Dave, Brian, José, and Roland on this reply.
>
> > > ---
> > > I think there's support for overriding the sole objection to this patch.
> > >
> > > To confirm:
> > >
> > > (1) The plan is to remove Autotools, perhaps after the 19.0 release
> > >
> > > (2) This patch's purpose is to ensure that everyone knows that
> > > Autotools will be going away (think: people who build Mesa as
> > > part of an automated process and wouldn't notice a deprecation
> > > warning unless it requires some action from them)
> >
> > If it's being removed _after_ the 19.0 release, does it make sense to
> > have a patch like this _in_ the 19.0 release? (Perhaps the answer is
> > `yes', but I'd still like to ask the question.)
>
> Yes, I think so -- I might be missing or misunderstanding a part of
> your question though.
>
> My thinking is in 19.0 mark autotools as deprecated with this patch so
> as to ensure everyone knows, and depending on progress on the blocking
> issues to aim for removal after the 19.0 branch point.

Perhaps I was just responding (in my head) too literally to your
comment about automated processes. If the automated process is around
building HEAD, then it's not necessary for this change to be in the
release. But I guess you also want to catch the people with automated
processes against released versions who might have various
hypothetical issues with meson, and you want them to report the issues
while they still have an easy fallback to autotools, as opposed to
when there's no other option and they're stuck in an inconvenient
situation.

So ... the answer is `yes'.

  -ilia
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Matt Turner]

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 2:28 PM Ilia Mirkin  wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 5:12 PM Matt Turner  wrote:
> >
> > From: Gert Wollny 
> >
> > Since Meson will eventually be the only build system deprecate autotools
> > now. It can still be used by invoking configure with the flag
> >   --enable-autotools
> >
> > NAKed-by: Ilia Mirkin 
>
> [nouveau]
>
> > Acked-by: Eric Engestrom 
> > Acked-by: Kenneth Graunke 
> > Acked-by: Lionel Landwerlin 
> > Acked-by: Jason Ekstrand 
> > Reviewed-by: Matt Turner 
>
> [intel]
>
> > Acked-by: Rob Clark 
>
> [freedreno]
>
> > Acked-by: Marek Olšák 
>
> [radeon]
>
> > Reviewed-by: Christian Gmeiner 
>
> [etnaviv]
>
> > Reviewed-by: Eric Anholt 
>
> [vc4]
>
> > Signed-off-by: Gert Wollny 
>
> [sorry Gert, not sure how to classify you]
>
> I think the vmware team (which largely maintains llvmpipe and svga) is
> probably worth hearing from -- I believe they've largely stayed out of
> it. But an ack/nack would be good. Also virgl isn't represented, I
> believe. Probably not *required* to hear from these, but perhaps worth
> a poke?

Sure. I've Cc'd Dave, Brian, José, and Roland on this reply.

> > ---
> > I think there's support for overriding the sole objection to this patch.
> >
> > To confirm:
> >
> > (1) The plan is to remove Autotools, perhaps after the 19.0 release
> >
> > (2) This patch's purpose is to ensure that everyone knows that
> > Autotools will be going away (think: people who build Mesa as
> > part of an automated process and wouldn't notice a deprecation
> > warning unless it requires some action from them)
>
> If it's being removed _after_ the 19.0 release, does it make sense to
> have a patch like this _in_ the 19.0 release? (Perhaps the answer is
> `yes', but I'd still like to ask the question.)

Yes, I think so -- I might be missing or misunderstanding a part of
your question though.

My thinking is in 19.0 mark autotools as deprecated with this patch so
as to ensure everyone knows, and depending on progress on the blocking
issues to aim for removal after the 19.0 branch point.
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Ilia Mirkin]

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 5:12 PM Matt Turner  wrote:
>
> From: Gert Wollny 
>
> Since Meson will eventually be the only build system deprecate autotools
> now. It can still be used by invoking configure with the flag
>   --enable-autotools
>
> NAKed-by: Ilia Mirkin 

[nouveau]

> Acked-by: Eric Engestrom 
> Acked-by: Kenneth Graunke 
> Acked-by: Lionel Landwerlin 
> Acked-by: Jason Ekstrand 
> Reviewed-by: Matt Turner 

[intel]

> Acked-by: Rob Clark 

[freedreno]

> Acked-by: Marek Olšák 

[radeon]

> Reviewed-by: Christian Gmeiner 

[etnaviv]

> Reviewed-by: Eric Anholt 

[vc4]

> Signed-off-by: Gert Wollny 

[sorry Gert, not sure how to classify you]

I think the vmware team (which largely maintains llvmpipe and svga) is
probably worth hearing from -- I believe they've largely stayed out of
it. But an ack/nack would be good. Also virgl isn't represented, I
believe. Probably not *required* to hear from these, but perhaps worth
a poke?

> ---
> I think there's support for overriding the sole objection to this patch.
>
> To confirm:
>
> (1) The plan is to remove Autotools, perhaps after the 19.0 release
>
> (2) This patch's purpose is to ensure that everyone knows that
> Autotools will be going away (think: people who build Mesa as
> part of an automated process and wouldn't notice a deprecation
> warning unless it requires some action from them)

If it's being removed _after_ the 19.0 release, does it make sense to
have a patch like this _in_ the 19.0 release? (Perhaps the answer is
`yes', but I'd still like to ask the question.)

>
> (3) We expect all reasonable concerns about Meson to be resolved
> before Autotools is removed (e.g., reconfiguration problems,
> retrieving configuration command line, configuration status
> output, etc.)
>
>  configure.ac | 13 +
>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
> index e4d20054d5f..c7473d77eff 100644
> --- a/configure.ac
> +++ b/configure.ac
> @@ -52,6 +52,19 @@ mingw*)
>  ;;
>  esac
>
> +AC_ARG_ENABLE(autotools,
> +   [AS_HELP_STRING([--enable-autotools],
> +   [Enable the use of this autotools based build 
> configuration])],
> +   [enable_autotools=$enableval], [enable_autotools=no])
> +
> +if test "x$enable_autotools" != "xyes" ; then
> +AC_MSG_ERROR([the autotools build system has been deprecated in favour of
> +meson and will be removed eventually. For instructions on how to use 
> meson
> +see https://www.mesa3d.org/meson.html.
> +If you still want to use the autotools build, then add --enable-autotools
> +to the configure command line.])
> +fi
> +
>  # Support silent build rules, requires at least automake-1.11. Disable
>  # by either passing --disable-silent-rules to configure or passing V=1
>  # to make
> --
> 2.19.2
>
> ___
> mesa-dev mailing list
> mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Matt Turner]

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 2:17 PM Jason Ekstrand  wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 4:11 PM Matt Turner  wrote:
>>
>> From: Gert Wollny 
>>
>> Since Meson will eventually be the only build system deprecate autotools
>> now. It can still be used by invoking configure with the flag
>>   --enable-autotools
>>
>> NAKed-by: Ilia Mirkin 
>> Acked-by: Eric Engestrom 
>> Acked-by: Kenneth Graunke 
>> Acked-by: Lionel Landwerlin 
>> Acked-by: Jason Ekstrand 
>> Acked-by: Rob Clark 
>> Acked-by: Marek Olšák 
>> Reviewed-by: Christian Gmeiner 
>> Reviewed-by: Matt Turner 
>> Reviewed-by: Eric Anholt 
>> Signed-off-by: Gert Wollny 
>> ---
>> I think there's support for overriding the sole objection to this patch.
>>
>> To confirm:
>>
>> (1) The plan is to remove Autotools, perhaps after the 19.0 release
>>
>> (2) This patch's purpose is to ensure that everyone knows that
>> Autotools will be going away (think: people who build Mesa as
>> part of an automated process and wouldn't notice a deprecation
>> warning unless it requires some action from them)
>>
>> (3) We expect all reasonable concerns about Meson to be resolved
>> before Autotools is removed (e.g., reconfiguration problems,
>> retrieving configuration command line, configuration status
>> output, etc.)
>
>
> Do we have a tracker bug for these yet?  It'd be good to have one if we don't 
> already so that we can keep track of the reasonable blocking issues.

We did not, but that's a good idea. I've created a tracker bug:

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109323

and will file blocking issues for the three things I mentioned above.
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Jason Ekstrand]

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 4:11 PM Matt Turner  wrote:

> From: Gert Wollny 
>
> Since Meson will eventually be the only build system deprecate autotools
> now. It can still be used by invoking configure with the flag
>   --enable-autotools
>
> NAKed-by: Ilia Mirkin 
> Acked-by: Eric Engestrom 
> Acked-by: Kenneth Graunke 
> Acked-by: Lionel Landwerlin 
> Acked-by: Jason Ekstrand 
> Acked-by: Rob Clark 
> Acked-by: Marek Olšák 
> Reviewed-by: Christian Gmeiner 
> Reviewed-by: Matt Turner 
> Reviewed-by: Eric Anholt 
> Signed-off-by: Gert Wollny 
> ---
> I think there's support for overriding the sole objection to this patch.
>
> To confirm:
>
> (1) The plan is to remove Autotools, perhaps after the 19.0 release
>
> (2) This patch's purpose is to ensure that everyone knows that
> Autotools will be going away (think: people who build Mesa as
> part of an automated process and wouldn't notice a deprecation
> warning unless it requires some action from them)
>
> (3) We expect all reasonable concerns about Meson to be resolved
> before Autotools is removed (e.g., reconfiguration problems,
> retrieving configuration command line, configuration status
> output, etc.)
>

Do we have a tracker bug for these yet?  It'd be good to have one if we
don't already so that we can keep track of the reasonable blocking issues.

--Jason


>
>  configure.ac | 13 +
>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
> index e4d20054d5f..c7473d77eff 100644
> --- a/configure.ac
> +++ b/configure.ac
> @@ -52,6 +52,19 @@ mingw*)
>  ;;
>  esac
>
> +AC_ARG_ENABLE(autotools,
> +   [AS_HELP_STRING([--enable-autotools],
> +   [Enable the use of this autotools based build
> configuration])],
> +   [enable_autotools=$enableval], [enable_autotools=no])
> +
> +if test "x$enable_autotools" != "xyes" ; then
> +AC_MSG_ERROR([the autotools build system has been deprecated in
> favour of
> +meson and will be removed eventually. For instructions on how to use
> meson
> +see https://www.mesa3d.org/meson.html.
> +If you still want to use the autotools build, then add
> --enable-autotools
> +to the configure command line.])
> +fi
> +
>  # Support silent build rules, requires at least automake-1.11. Disable
>  # by either passing --disable-silent-rules to configure or passing V=1
>  # to make
> --
> 2.19.2
>
> ___
> mesa-dev mailing list
> mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
>
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Matt Turner]

From: Gert Wollny 

Since Meson will eventually be the only build system deprecate autotools
now. It can still be used by invoking configure with the flag
  --enable-autotools

NAKed-by: Ilia Mirkin 
Acked-by: Eric Engestrom 
Acked-by: Kenneth Graunke 
Acked-by: Lionel Landwerlin 
Acked-by: Jason Ekstrand 
Acked-by: Rob Clark 
Acked-by: Marek Olšák 
Reviewed-by: Christian Gmeiner 
Reviewed-by: Matt Turner 
Reviewed-by: Eric Anholt 
Signed-off-by: Gert Wollny 
---
I think there's support for overriding the sole objection to this patch.

To confirm:

(1) The plan is to remove Autotools, perhaps after the 19.0 release

(2) This patch's purpose is to ensure that everyone knows that
Autotools will be going away (think: people who build Mesa as
part of an automated process and wouldn't notice a deprecation
warning unless it requires some action from them)

(3) We expect all reasonable concerns about Meson to be resolved
before Autotools is removed (e.g., reconfiguration problems,
retrieving configuration command line, configuration status
output, etc.)

 configure.ac | 13 +
 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)

diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
index e4d20054d5f..c7473d77eff 100644
--- a/configure.ac
+++ b/configure.ac
@@ -52,6 +52,19 @@ mingw*)
 ;;
 esac
 
+AC_ARG_ENABLE(autotools,
+   [AS_HELP_STRING([--enable-autotools],
+   [Enable the use of this autotools based build 
configuration])],
+   [enable_autotools=$enableval], [enable_autotools=no])
+
+if test "x$enable_autotools" != "xyes" ; then
+AC_MSG_ERROR([the autotools build system has been deprecated in favour of
+meson and will be removed eventually. For instructions on how to use meson
+see https://www.mesa3d.org/meson.html.
+If you still want to use the autotools build, then add --enable-autotools
+to the configure command line.])
+fi
+
 # Support silent build rules, requires at least automake-1.11. Disable
 # by either passing --disable-silent-rules to configure or passing V=1
 # to make
-- 
2.19.2

___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Eric Anholt]

Gert Wollny  writes:

> Since Meson will eventually be the only build system deprecate autotools
> now. It can still be used by invoking configure with the flag
>   --enable-autotools
>
> Signed-off-by: Gert Wollny 

Reviewed-by: Eric Anholt 


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Christian Gmeiner]

Am So., 16. Dez. 2018 um 12:24 Uhr schrieb Gert Wollny :
>
> Since Meson will eventually be the only build system deprecate autotools
> now. It can still be used by invoking configure with the flag
>   --enable-autotools
>
> Signed-off-by: Gert Wollny 

Reviewed-by: Christian Gmeiner 

> ---
> IMO autotools should be properly deprecated prior it its removal, so here
> is a patch to do just that. I think autotools should be marked as deprecated
> for the 19.0 release and, depending on feedback, it could be removed with 
> 19.1.
> Anyway, in the end it's up to the release team how to handle this.
>
> Best,
> Gert
>
>  configure.ac | 13 +
>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
> index 9b437a252c..73f5978bb7 100644
> --- a/configure.ac
> +++ b/configure.ac
> @@ -52,6 +52,19 @@ mingw*)
>  ;;
>  esac
>
> +AC_ARG_ENABLE(autotools,
> +   [AS_HELP_STRING([--enable-autotools],
> +   [Enable the use of this autotools based build 
> configuration])],
> +   [enable_autotools=$enableval], [enable_autotools=no])
> +
> +if test "x$enable_autotools" != "xyes" ; then
> +AC_MSG_ERROR([the autotools build system has been deprecated in favour of
> +meson and will be removed eventually. For instructions on how to use 
> meson
> +see https://www.mesa3d.org/meson.html.
> +If you still want to use the autotools build, then add --enable-autotools
> +to the configure command line.])
> +fi
> +
>  # Support silent build rules, requires at least automake-1.11. Disable
>  # by either passing --disable-silent-rules to configure or passing V=1
>  # to make
> --
> 2.19.2
>
> ___
> mesa-dev mailing list
> mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev



-- 
greets
--
Christian Gmeiner, MSc

https://christian-gmeiner.info
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Marek Olšák]

Acked-by: Marek Olšák 

Marek

On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 6:24 AM Gert Wollny  wrote:

> Since Meson will eventually be the only build system deprecate autotools
> now. It can still be used by invoking configure with the flag
>   --enable-autotools
>
> Signed-off-by: Gert Wollny 
> ---
> IMO autotools should be properly deprecated prior it its removal, so here
> is a patch to do just that. I think autotools should be marked as
> deprecated
> for the 19.0 release and, depending on feedback, it could be removed with
> 19.1.
> Anyway, in the end it's up to the release team how to handle this.
>
> Best,
> Gert
>
>  configure.ac | 13 +
>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
> index 9b437a252c..73f5978bb7 100644
> --- a/configure.ac
> +++ b/configure.ac
> @@ -52,6 +52,19 @@ mingw*)
>  ;;
>  esac
>
> +AC_ARG_ENABLE(autotools,
> +   [AS_HELP_STRING([--enable-autotools],
> +   [Enable the use of this autotools based build
> configuration])],
> +   [enable_autotools=$enableval], [enable_autotools=no])
> +
> +if test "x$enable_autotools" != "xyes" ; then
> +AC_MSG_ERROR([the autotools build system has been deprecated in
> favour of
> +meson and will be removed eventually. For instructions on how to use
> meson
> +see https://www.mesa3d.org/meson.html.
> +If you still want to use the autotools build, then add
> --enable-autotools
> +to the configure command line.])
> +fi
> +
>  # Support silent build rules, requires at least automake-1.11. Disable
>  # by either passing --disable-silent-rules to configure or passing V=1
>  # to make
> --
> 2.19.2
>
> ___
> mesa-dev mailing list
> mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
>
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Jason Ekstrand]

On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 9:41 AM Matt Turner  wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 1:36 AM Stuart Young  wrote:
> > Yes, but at the moment we have no consensus and a deadlock on the issue.
>
> Consensus need not be unanimous. We have consensus.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gert Wollny 
> Reviewed-by: Matt Turner 
> Acked-by: Eric Engestrom 
> Acked-by: Kenneth Graunke 
>

Acked-by: Jason Ekstrand 


> and I would probably include Jason and Marek in this group as well,
> though they did not offer a *-by.
>
> I don't think there's anything to continue debating, so this will be
> my last contribution to the thread.
> ___
> mesa-dev mailing list
> mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
>
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Rob Clark]

On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 11:37 AM Lionel Landwerlin
 wrote:
>
> On 19/12/2018 17:19, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
> > On Wednesday, December 19, 2018 8:10:49 AM PST Eric Engestrom wrote:
> >> The point of this patch is for people to not be able to ignore this, and
> >> have to become aware of the existence of Meson and our intention to
> >> remove autotools, whenever this may happen.
> >>
> >> Some people have already noticed, probably because they keep up with
> >> mesa-dev@, but the point is that some people haven't.
> >>
> >> Without this patch:
> >> - people will continue being unaware, until
> >> - autotools gets removed, and these people are going to try their
> >>use-cases, and probably find issues
> >> - issues will get fixed, hopefully quickly, but blocking them completely
> >>in the mean time
> >>
> >> With this patch:
> >> - people will *have to notice* that something's changing
> >> - they'll choose to either ignore it, use the flag, and *choose* to go
> >>with the option above
> >> - or they can choose to try meson, get any issues fixed *while still
> >>being able to work with their old setup in the mean time*
> >>
> >> This last bit is the entire point of this patch, so let me repeat it:
> >> people will report meson issues while there's still time to use their
> >> old autotools setup.
> >>
> >> I'm definitely in favour:
> >> Acked-by: Eric Engestrom 
> > Eric's reasoning here makes sense.  In case there is anyone out there
> > who has been putting off trying Meson, this will properly exhort them
> > to try it, and identify any problems, yet still let them continue using
> > their old system for a little while longer.
> >
> > Acked-by: Kenneth Graunke 
> >
> > I've been using Meson for a long time, and it is dramatically better to
> > work with - both to write, and to use.  It is a little bit different,
> > and that took some getting used to.  But it was absolutely worth it.
> >
> > We need a way to make progress here.  Matt's concern is very valid -
> > people can simply keep moving the goal posts.  And that's incredibly
> > frustrating for the people doing the work.
> >
> > Given that we've had the Meson build system for over a year, I think
> > time is up.  Marek once received review feedback to a patch a year after
> > he wrote it, and he responded with something like "I've moved on, feel
> > free to write a patch."  I think that applies here.  The Meson build has
> > had many contributors at this point.  If it's not good enough, feel free
> > to help fix it.  It's worth noting that it is good enough for the major
> > distros, which have switched, and a large portion of the community uses
> > it exclusively.  Dylan has done a ton of work to upstream Meson to
> > address our needs and improve the usability of the project.  The rest
> > of the Meson developers have been very responsible as well.  We have
> > every reason to believe it will keep getting better.
> >
> > We can't keep kicking the autotools can down the road indefinitely.
> > We need a forcing function like this patch, then eventual removal.
> > Expecting new contributors to write 4 build systems is just...bad.
> > I'm hopeful that we can get down to two (Meson and Android) soon.
> >
> > For what it's worth, I'm hoping to merge Iris soon, and it does not have
> > an autotools build system, nor do I intend to write one.  At that point,
> > you won't be able to build the new Intel OpenGL drivers with autotools.
> >
> > --Ken
>
> I very much agree with Ken here.
> Autotools has been a pain to deal with especially since we had to
> maintain 2 build systems.
> We already have part of our tools that do not get built with Autotools.
> I think the main reason being that debugging Meson builds is a lot
> faster that Autotools ones.
> So I would be happy if we could send a signal that this will go soon and
> strongly recommend users to tell us what isn't working.
>
> Just finally adding that pretty big projects like systemd (only uses
> Meson), GLib (both Meson/Autotools, but Meson default) and a bunch of
> other Gnome stuff is now being built with Meson in major distros (just
> checked Debian which also builds Mesa using Meson), so it seems to me at
> least a significant part of the community won't be very surprised.
> And this patch is the call for people who haven't noticed yet.
>
> Acked-by: Lionel Landwerlin 
>

I also agree that maintaining 2 build systems (well, actually 3
because android) is major pita, and meson is much nicer to deal with
than autotools.  I think the approach that this patch is taking, to a
little more actively push people who haven't tried meson to give it a
try and speak up if something is missing, is extremely reasonable and
far more conservative than what a lot of other projects have done.

Acked-by: Rob Clark 

> -
> Lionel
> ___
> mesa-dev mailing list
> mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Lionel Landwerlin]

On 19/12/2018 17:19, Kenneth Graunke wrote:

On Wednesday, December 19, 2018 8:10:49 AM PST Eric Engestrom wrote:

The point of this patch is for people to not be able to ignore this, and
have to become aware of the existence of Meson and our intention to
remove autotools, whenever this may happen.

Some people have already noticed, probably because they keep up with
mesa-dev@, but the point is that some people haven't.

Without this patch:
- people will continue being unaware, until
- autotools gets removed, and these people are going to try their
   use-cases, and probably find issues
- issues will get fixed, hopefully quickly, but blocking them completely
   in the mean time

With this patch:
- people will *have to notice* that something's changing
- they'll choose to either ignore it, use the flag, and *choose* to go
   with the option above
- or they can choose to try meson, get any issues fixed *while still
   being able to work with their old setup in the mean time*

This last bit is the entire point of this patch, so let me repeat it:
people will report meson issues while there's still time to use their
old autotools setup.

I'm definitely in favour:
Acked-by: Eric Engestrom 

Eric's reasoning here makes sense.  In case there is anyone out there
who has been putting off trying Meson, this will properly exhort them
to try it, and identify any problems, yet still let them continue using
their old system for a little while longer.

Acked-by: Kenneth Graunke 

I've been using Meson for a long time, and it is dramatically better to
work with - both to write, and to use.  It is a little bit different,
and that took some getting used to.  But it was absolutely worth it.

We need a way to make progress here.  Matt's concern is very valid -
people can simply keep moving the goal posts.  And that's incredibly
frustrating for the people doing the work.

Given that we've had the Meson build system for over a year, I think
time is up.  Marek once received review feedback to a patch a year after
he wrote it, and he responded with something like "I've moved on, feel
free to write a patch."  I think that applies here.  The Meson build has
had many contributors at this point.  If it's not good enough, feel free
to help fix it.  It's worth noting that it is good enough for the major
distros, which have switched, and a large portion of the community uses
it exclusively.  Dylan has done a ton of work to upstream Meson to
address our needs and improve the usability of the project.  The rest
of the Meson developers have been very responsible as well.  We have
every reason to believe it will keep getting better.

We can't keep kicking the autotools can down the road indefinitely.
We need a forcing function like this patch, then eventual removal.
Expecting new contributors to write 4 build systems is just...bad.
I'm hopeful that we can get down to two (Meson and Android) soon.

For what it's worth, I'm hoping to merge Iris soon, and it does not have
an autotools build system, nor do I intend to write one.  At that point,
you won't be able to build the new Intel OpenGL drivers with autotools.

--Ken


I very much agree with Ken here.
Autotools has been a pain to deal with especially since we had to 
maintain 2 build systems.
We already have part of our tools that do not get built with Autotools. 
I think the main reason being that debugging Meson builds is a lot 
faster that Autotools ones.
So I would be happy if we could send a signal that this will go soon and 
strongly recommend users to tell us what isn't working.


Just finally adding that pretty big projects like systemd (only uses 
Meson), GLib (both Meson/Autotools, but Meson default) and a bunch of 
other Gnome stuff is now being built with Meson in major distros (just 
checked Debian which also builds Mesa using Meson), so it seems to me at 
least a significant part of the community won't be very surprised.

And this patch is the call for people who haven't noticed yet.

Acked-by: Lionel Landwerlin 

-
Lionel
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Matt Turner]

On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 1:36 AM Stuart Young  wrote:
> Yes, but at the moment we have no consensus and a deadlock on the issue.

Consensus need not be unanimous. We have consensus.

Signed-off-by: Gert Wollny 
Reviewed-by: Matt Turner 
Acked-by: Eric Engestrom 
Acked-by: Kenneth Graunke 

and I would probably include Jason and Marek in this group as well,
though they did not offer a *-by.

I don't think there's anything to continue debating, so this will be
my last contribution to the thread.
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Ilia Mirkin]

On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 9:37 AM Gert Wollny  wrote:
>
> Hello Stuart,
>
> Am Donnerstag, den 20.12.2018, 13:40 +1100 schrieb Stuart Young:
> > Gert/Ilia,
> >
> > Could this be reduced this from an error to a warning, with the
> > command-line option suppressing the warning?
> >
> > Perhaps as well as producing the warning, the build could sleep for
> > say 30 seconds after producing the warning message. This would be
> > noticeable if you're building it yourself (which would definitely get
> > the message out there), but wouldn't stop automated build processes
> > (as it's not stopping, just sleeping).
> >
> > At a later date (when meson has more exposure) then perhaps we could
> > move from a warning to an error.
>
> I would agree to that, at least it would bring us forward to give a
> proper warning to users before autotools is deleted. If, you Ilia could
>  agree to such an approach I would propose a new patch,

This would again punish users for using the thing that works for everyone.

A banner at the bottom (or top, whichever you think is more visible)
of the thing that configure prints at the end saying effectively "hey,
btw, check out meson, send feedback to mesa-dev" but perhaps in a few
more words/details would seem appropriate.

  -ilia
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Gert Wollny]

Hello Stuart, 

Am Donnerstag, den 20.12.2018, 13:40 +1100 schrieb Stuart Young:
> Gert/Ilia,
> 
> Could this be reduced this from an error to a warning, with the
> command-line option suppressing the warning?
> 
> Perhaps as well as producing the warning, the build could sleep for
> say 30 seconds after producing the warning message. This would be
> noticeable if you're building it yourself (which would definitely get
> the message out there), but wouldn't stop automated build processes
> (as it's not stopping, just sleeping).
> 
> At a later date (when meson has more exposure) then perhaps we could
> move from a warning to an error.

I would agree to that, at least it would bring us forward to give a
proper warning to users before autotools is deleted. If, you Ilia could
 agree to such an approach I would propose a new patch, 

Best,
Gert

___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Stuart Young]

Sorry. Copy-paste decided to send a msg rather than paste into it.

On Fri, 21 Dec 2018 at 17:36, Stuart Young  wrote:

> On Fri, 21 Dec 2018 at 04:18, Eero Tamminen 
> wrote:
>
>> On 20.12.2018 4.40, Stuart Young wrote:
>> > Could this be reduced this from an error to a warning, with the
>> > command-line option suppressing the warning?
>> >
>> > Perhaps as well as producing the warning, the build could sleep for say
>> > 30 seconds after producing the warning message. This would be
>> noticeable
>> > if you're building it yourself (which would definitely get the message
>> > out there), but wouldn't stop automated build processes (as it's not
>> > stopping, just sleeping).
>> >
>> > At a later date (when meson has more exposure) then perhaps we could
>> > move from a warning to an error.
>> >
>> > Thoughts?
>>
>> So it would take 2 releases i.e. about 1/2 year?
>>
>
> Not necessarily. IMO if there's enough consensus between 19.0 and 19.1,
> then changing it to an error could happen then. I'm basing this on the fact
> that every .0 release specifically says something like this:
>

 Mesa 18.3.0 is a new development release. People who are concerned with
stability and reliability should stick with a previous release or wait for
Mesa 18.3.1.

Of course, this isn't my call. I'm just trying to suggest ways to break the
deadlock.

* In next release autotools build is going to warn that meson should be
>> used instead, as autotools support will be eventually removed.
>>
>> * Next release from that:
>>- errors out if specific option isn't used for doing building with
>> autotools
>>- tells that autotools support will be removed in following release
>>
>> * Release after that removes autotools support.
>>
>>
>> (I assume Emil would be the person supporting Autotools during this as
>> he had already volunteered for it.)
>>
>>
>> While I think above is closer to how other large projects do deprecation
>> in general (= have clear deprecation period/releases), build system
>> changes are probably more often done just with flag day (early in the
>> release cycle, as maintaining multiple build systems can be pretty large
>> pain).
>>
>
> Yes, but at the moment we have no consensus and a deadlock on the issue.
>

-- 
Stuart Young (aka Cefiar)
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Stuart Young]

On Fri, 21 Dec 2018 at 04:18, Eero Tamminen 
wrote:

> On 20.12.2018 4.40, Stuart Young wrote:
> > Could this be reduced this from an error to a warning, with the
> > command-line option suppressing the warning?
> >
> > Perhaps as well as producing the warning, the build could sleep for say
> > 30 seconds after producing the warning message. This would be noticeable
> > if you're building it yourself (which would definitely get the message
> > out there), but wouldn't stop automated build processes (as it's not
> > stopping, just sleeping).
> >
> > At a later date (when meson has more exposure) then perhaps we could
> > move from a warning to an error.
> >
> > Thoughts?
>
> So it would take 2 releases i.e. about 1/2 year?
>

Not necessarily. IMO if there's enough consensus between 19.0 and 19.1,
then changing it to an error could happen then. I'm basing this on the fact
that every .0 release specifically says something like this:



>
> * In next release autotools build is going to warn that meson should be
> used instead, as autotools support will be eventually removed.
>
> * Next release from that:
>- errors out if specific option isn't used for doing building with
> autotools
>- tells that autotools support will be removed in following release
>
> * Release after that removes autotools support.
>
>
> (I assume Emil would be the person supporting Autotools during this as
> he had already volunteered for it.)
>
>
> While I think above is closer to how other large projects do deprecation
> in general (= have clear deprecation period/releases), build system
> changes are probably more often done just with flag day (early in the
> release cycle, as maintaining multiple build systems can be pretty large
> pain).
>

Yes, but at the moment we have no consensus and a deadlock on the issue.



-- 
Stuart Young (aka Cefiar)
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Eero Tamminen]

Hi,

On 20.12.2018 4.40, Stuart Young wrote:
Could this be reduced this from an error to a warning, with the 
command-line option suppressing the warning?


Perhaps as well as producing the warning, the build could sleep for say 
30 seconds after producing the warning message. This would be noticeable 
if you're building it yourself (which would definitely get the message 
out there), but wouldn't stop automated build processes (as it's not 
stopping, just sleeping).


At a later date (when meson has more exposure) then perhaps we could 
move from a warning to an error.


Thoughts?


So it would take 2 releases i.e. about 1/2 year?

* In next release autotools build is going to warn that meson should be 
used instead, as autotools support will be eventually removed.


* Next release from that:
  - errors out if specific option isn't used for doing building with 
autotools

  - tells that autotools support will be removed in following release

* Release after that removes autotools support.


(I assume Emil would be the person supporting Autotools during this as 
he had already volunteered for it.)



While I think above is closer to how other large projects do deprecation 
in general (= have clear deprecation period/releases), build system 
changes are probably more often done just with flag day (early in the 
release cycle, as maintaining multiple build systems can be pretty large 
pain).



- Eero




On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 at 07:37, Gert Wollny > wrote:


Am Mittwoch, den 19.12.2018, 12:19 -0500 schrieb Ilia Mirkin:
 > On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 6:24 AM Gert Wollny mailto:gw.foss...@gmail.com>>
 > wrote:
 > >
 > > Since Meson will eventually be the only build system deprecate
 > > autotools
 > > now. It can still be used by invoking configure with the flag
 > >   --enable-autotools
 > >
 > > Signed-off-by: Gert Wollny mailto:gw.foss...@gmail.com>>
 >
 > In case it's not clear from the later discussion:
 >
 > Strongly NAKed-by: Ilia Mirkin mailto:imir...@alum.mit.edu>>
 > This should not be applied to the repository.

You should probably add this to the patch proposals that want to remove
autotools then.

I'm certainly not going to push this patch with your NAK, but I'd like
to ask you to reconsider: All this patch does is require to add  --
enable-autotools to the configure call once - a little hickup in the
workflow of those who do not yet use exclusively meson, but it gets the
message out to the others that things are going to change.

Best,
Gert

___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org 
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev



--
Stuart Young (aka Cefiar)

___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev



___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Ilia Mirkin]

On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 12:50 PM Jason Ekstrand  wrote:
> What do you suggest to solve this communication issue?  If autotools survives 
> another release, so be it.  However, I want to get us out of the vicious 
> cycle of long e-mail threads and endless debates and on to a model where 
> Dylan is working towards something and is able to actually close the gap.  
> The cynic in me says that if the last week's exchanges teach us anything, 
> it's that we'll never make the naysayers happy and we're wasting our time 
> trying.  I badly don't want that to be true.  However, for my internal cynic 
> to be proven wrong, we need a more productive model for how we close that gap 
> and agree that it's "good enough."  What do you suggest?

Well, there are a few considerations here. First of all, "who should
we ask". I'm thinking, whoever's had at least 25 changes this year
[not a scientific cut-off, could go higher or lower, but some
precedence for that number -- iirc Valve uses that as the cut-off for
giving the all-valve-games-package]:

git shortlog origin --since 2018-01-01 | grep '^\w' | awk -F"[()]"
'$(NF-1) > 25'

This works out to 49 people as of a few days ago. I'm thinking these
are all people who have built mesa over and over and over again, and
know the various pitfalls, as well as are remaining active
contributors and thus "part of the community". Ideally these people
would also be the ones who know the sorts of issues that end-users run
into through doing a bunch of support, but that's harder to screen
for. Separately go through each driver and state tracker, and ensure
that at least one significant contributor for each one is on that list
of people. Glancing over the above list, I believe that's already the
case, but a thorough check should be performed.

When the current crop of issues is fixed, you should request that each
of these people give the current checked-in meson setup a fair shake
or forever hold their peace re build systems. You should give about 2
weeks for people to do this -- I know many of the issues I ran into
weren't on day 1 but rather on day 10 of using meson.

Of these, I assume a bunch won't care and bow out. The remainder
should submit a list of asks for a replacement. Hopefully we're all
grown-ups and don't ask for the moon -- any outliers can be dealt with
separately. I think anything that's materially over and above what
autotools does now is just out. However you need to be prepared for
feedback that requires changes to meson.

Any feedback you [the "meson" group] believe is not worth addressing
(or would incur an unduly high amount of effort to resolve) should be
separated out [and collated], and we can, as a group decide if it's
really worth dealing with or not.

Rinse and repeat until the concerns of the group are either addressed
or deemed too esoteric.

I realize I've taken some shortcuts here ... who determines what's
esoteric and what's not, and how does the group come to a consensus on
it? I'm hoping we can all be reasonable, and not have to have it come
to that. If there's a situation that's not resolvable directly, we'll
have to figure it out then.

>
> what are we supposed to do about the things which aren't actually worse but 
> are just different?

All these things are preferences, of course. Each complaint should be
triaged and decided whether it's important to fix or not. On top of
preference, practical considerations need to be taken into account --
difficulty, importance, etc. Different isn't necessarily bad, but it's
also not necessarily good. I believe it would be a laudable goal to
have a way to make this all entirely transparent to the average user
[who doesn't care to learn a fancy new system], and in my mind I've
sketched out a pretty trivial way to get to it. Perhaps there's a
giant gaping hole in my estimate which makes it go from "easy" to
"very hard", at which point I'd obviously reconsider the necessity.

Lastly, I suspect many of you who are eager to get the shiny new meson
build to be the default are considering me to be the bad guy here -- I
don't really mind. However realize that there are people out there who
*do* mind that sort of thing. Either due to personality, or due to job
security (for many of the frequent contributors, mesa is their day
job), or due to being on the same team and not wanting real-life
weirdness, people won't speak up. I don't think we're at the point
where feedback needs to be anonymous or anything, but it's something
to be mindful of as we make changes that affect everyone's workflows.

Cheers,

  -ilia
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Stuart Young]

Gert/Ilia,

Could this be reduced this from an error to a warning, with the
command-line option suppressing the warning?

Perhaps as well as producing the warning, the build could sleep for say 30
seconds after producing the warning message. This would be noticeable if
you're building it yourself (which would definitely get the message out
there), but wouldn't stop automated build processes (as it's not stopping,
just sleeping).

At a later date (when meson has more exposure) then perhaps we could move
from a warning to an error.

Thoughts?


On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 at 07:37, Gert Wollny  wrote:

> Am Mittwoch, den 19.12.2018, 12:19 -0500 schrieb Ilia Mirkin:
> > On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 6:24 AM Gert Wollny 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Since Meson will eventually be the only build system deprecate
> > > autotools
> > > now. It can still be used by invoking configure with the flag
> > >   --enable-autotools
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Gert Wollny 
> >
> > In case it's not clear from the later discussion:
> >
> > Strongly NAKed-by: Ilia Mirkin 
> > This should not be applied to the repository.
>
> You should probably add this to the patch proposals that want to remove
> autotools then.
>
> I'm certainly not going to push this patch with your NAK, but I'd like
> to ask you to reconsider: All this patch does is require to add  --
> enable-autotools to the configure call once - a little hickup in the
> workflow of those who do not yet use exclusively meson, but it gets the
> message out to the others that things are going to change.
>
> Best,
> Gert
>
> ___
> mesa-dev mailing list
> mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
>


-- 
Stuart Young (aka Cefiar)
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Gert Wollny]

Am Mittwoch, den 19.12.2018, 12:19 -0500 schrieb Ilia Mirkin:
> On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 6:24 AM Gert Wollny 
> wrote:
> > 
> > Since Meson will eventually be the only build system deprecate
> > autotools
> > now. It can still be used by invoking configure with the flag
> >   --enable-autotools
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Gert Wollny 
> 
> In case it's not clear from the later discussion:
> 
> Strongly NAKed-by: Ilia Mirkin 
> This should not be applied to the repository.

You should probably add this to the patch proposals that want to remove
autotools then. 

I'm certainly not going to push this patch with your NAK, but I'd like
to ask you to reconsider: All this patch does is require to add  --
enable-autotools to the configure call once - a little hickup in the
workflow of those who do not yet use exclusively meson, but it gets the
message out to the others that things are going to change.

Best, 
Gert 

___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Marek Olšák]

FWIW, with all the feedback I've given, I think autotools is not better
than meson. The issues that I reported won't make me switch back to
autotools.

Marek

On Wed, Dec 19, 2018, 12:45 PM Jason Ekstrand  On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 10:32 AM Ilia Mirkin  wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 11:03 AM Jason Ekstrand 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 9:32 AM Ilia Mirkin 
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 10:25 AM Matt Turner 
>> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 8:06 AM Ilia Mirkin 
>> wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 1:01 AM Matt Turner 
>> wrote:
>> >> > > > WTF would you have us do?
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Same thing as for any change with an impact this wide --
>> >> > >
>> >> > > 1. Identify stakeholders. In this case, probably the sub-project
>> >> > > maintainers, major contributors, and a smattering of distro
>> >> > > maintainers.
>> >> > > 2. Make them happy, or at least get them, as a group, to agree that
>> >> > > it's "good enough".
>> >> >
>> >> > So we're trying to get better coverage than what you're suggesting.
>> >> >
>> >> > > 3. Apply.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > This is the point at which you can make autotools less visible.
>> We're
>> >> > > not at that point yet.
>> >> >
>> >> > Ilia, it's an extra flag. I think you'll survive.
>> >>
>> >> It's an advertising strategy for meson (hello world, check this out,
>> >> it's going to be the default soon). It can be done at the final stage.
>> >> We're not at that stage.
>> >>
>> >> We're at the stage of "hello community, we'd like to replace
>> >> autotools", and the community coming back to you with feedback.
>> >
>> >
>> > I disagree.  I think we were at that stage 6-8 months ago and a bunch
>> of the community didn't come back with feedback until we sent a patch to
>> delete autotools.  Identify stakeholders?  Done; the distros are all cool
>> with it or have already switched.  Agree it's "good enough"?  We thought
>> we'd done that and then people raised issues at the 11th hour.  Even with
>> those issues, the ones that are real issues with meson are all in-progress
>> to fix.  The others are just "make it look like autotools so I can pretend
>> meson doesn't exist".  Please pardon my frustration but we thought we'd
>> done our due diligence and it wasn't until we took a step very much like
>> this one that we actually got feedback from certain people such as
>> yourself.  To say that we're only now getting to the "hello community, we'd
>> like to replace autotools" stage is a bit disingenuous.
>> >
>> > That said, that doesn't mean I think this patch is the right way to
>> go.  I think the referenced e-mail conversaion has flushed out enough of
>> the remaining issues that we need to fix a couple of remaining things in
>> meson and then just delete autotools.  Maybe this means that autotools
>> stays around for one more release but then I think we should just can it
>> without bothering with the extra deprecation step.
>>
>> First -- I want you (and Dylan, and others who are pushing this) to
>> know that I understand your frustration. Making big changes is a giant
>> pain. Not only is the change itself difficult (aka 80% of the work),
>> but then you have to herd all the cats to make it all happen. And cats
>> don't like to be herded (which is why 20% of the work takes 80% of the
>> time).
>>
>> Second -- you're not just getting to "hello community" -- you've been
>> there for a while. But it's not a signpost to move past (like an
>> announcement might be), it's a stage to complete. The community has to
>> be happy. You're saying the concerns are last-second, but I've been
>> seeing these complaints going on for a while (stuff about saving env
>> vars, inability to see how you configured something, etc). I was
>> expecting these would all be addressed before I had to have another
>> look. And then all of a sudden, "let's drop autotools!" and variants
>> thereof.
>>
>
> I thought I recalled some fairly big "meson is ready; please try it out
> and report issues" e-mails in the past but I'm having trouble finding them
> today.  I do recall you having some complaints early on but, to be honest,
> I don't remember what form those took or how/if they got dealt with.  I
> think one of the failings here is that we really need some sort of a
> check-list of things that need to happen prior to autotools deprecation
> which people can lobby to get things added to.  I think dylan has a
> checklist somewhere but it may not be sufficiently public/obvious such that
> some of your complaints never got logged there.
>
> What do you suggest to solve this communication issue?  If autotools
> survives another release, so be it.  However, I want to get us out of the
> vicious cycle of long e-mail threads and endless debates and on to a model
> where Dylan is working towards something and is able to actually close the
> gap.  The cynic in me says that if the last week's exchanges teach us
> anything, it's that we'll 

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Jason Ekstrand]

On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 10:32 AM Ilia Mirkin  wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 11:03 AM Jason Ekstrand 
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 9:32 AM Ilia Mirkin 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 10:25 AM Matt Turner 
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 8:06 AM Ilia Mirkin 
> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 1:01 AM Matt Turner 
> wrote:
> >> > > > WTF would you have us do?
> >> > >
> >> > > Same thing as for any change with an impact this wide --
> >> > >
> >> > > 1. Identify stakeholders. In this case, probably the sub-project
> >> > > maintainers, major contributors, and a smattering of distro
> >> > > maintainers.
> >> > > 2. Make them happy, or at least get them, as a group, to agree that
> >> > > it's "good enough".
> >> >
> >> > So we're trying to get better coverage than what you're suggesting.
> >> >
> >> > > 3. Apply.
> >> > >
> >> > > This is the point at which you can make autotools less visible.
> We're
> >> > > not at that point yet.
> >> >
> >> > Ilia, it's an extra flag. I think you'll survive.
> >>
> >> It's an advertising strategy for meson (hello world, check this out,
> >> it's going to be the default soon). It can be done at the final stage.
> >> We're not at that stage.
> >>
> >> We're at the stage of "hello community, we'd like to replace
> >> autotools", and the community coming back to you with feedback.
> >
> >
> > I disagree.  I think we were at that stage 6-8 months ago and a bunch of
> the community didn't come back with feedback until we sent a patch to
> delete autotools.  Identify stakeholders?  Done; the distros are all cool
> with it or have already switched.  Agree it's "good enough"?  We thought
> we'd done that and then people raised issues at the 11th hour.  Even with
> those issues, the ones that are real issues with meson are all in-progress
> to fix.  The others are just "make it look like autotools so I can pretend
> meson doesn't exist".  Please pardon my frustration but we thought we'd
> done our due diligence and it wasn't until we took a step very much like
> this one that we actually got feedback from certain people such as
> yourself.  To say that we're only now getting to the "hello community, we'd
> like to replace autotools" stage is a bit disingenuous.
> >
> > That said, that doesn't mean I think this patch is the right way to go.
> I think the referenced e-mail conversaion has flushed out enough of the
> remaining issues that we need to fix a couple of remaining things in meson
> and then just delete autotools.  Maybe this means that autotools stays
> around for one more release but then I think we should just can it without
> bothering with the extra deprecation step.
>
> First -- I want you (and Dylan, and others who are pushing this) to
> know that I understand your frustration. Making big changes is a giant
> pain. Not only is the change itself difficult (aka 80% of the work),
> but then you have to herd all the cats to make it all happen. And cats
> don't like to be herded (which is why 20% of the work takes 80% of the
> time).
>
> Second -- you're not just getting to "hello community" -- you've been
> there for a while. But it's not a signpost to move past (like an
> announcement might be), it's a stage to complete. The community has to
> be happy. You're saying the concerns are last-second, but I've been
> seeing these complaints going on for a while (stuff about saving env
> vars, inability to see how you configured something, etc). I was
> expecting these would all be addressed before I had to have another
> look. And then all of a sudden, "let's drop autotools!" and variants
> thereof.
>

I thought I recalled some fairly big "meson is ready; please try it out and
report issues" e-mails in the past but I'm having trouble finding them
today.  I do recall you having some complaints early on but, to be honest,
I don't remember what form those took or how/if they got dealt with.  I
think one of the failings here is that we really need some sort of a
check-list of things that need to happen prior to autotools deprecation
which people can lobby to get things added to.  I think dylan has a
checklist somewhere but it may not be sufficiently public/obvious such that
some of your complaints never got logged there.

What do you suggest to solve this communication issue?  If autotools
survives another release, so be it.  However, I want to get us out of the
vicious cycle of long e-mail threads and endless debates and on to a model
where Dylan is working towards something and is able to actually close the
gap.  The cynic in me says that if the last week's exchanges teach us
anything, it's that we'll never make the naysayers happy and we're wasting
our time trying.  I badly don't want that to be true.  However, for my
internal cynic to be proven wrong, we need a more productive model for how
we close that gap and agree that it's "good enough."  What do you suggest?


> What you've been doing thus far is getting all 

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Kenneth Graunke]

On Wednesday, December 19, 2018 8:10:49 AM PST Eric Engestrom wrote:
> The point of this patch is for people to not be able to ignore this, and
> have to become aware of the existence of Meson and our intention to
> remove autotools, whenever this may happen.
> 
> Some people have already noticed, probably because they keep up with
> mesa-dev@, but the point is that some people haven't.
> 
> Without this patch:
> - people will continue being unaware, until
> - autotools gets removed, and these people are going to try their
>   use-cases, and probably find issues
> - issues will get fixed, hopefully quickly, but blocking them completely
>   in the mean time
> 
> With this patch:
> - people will *have to notice* that something's changing
> - they'll choose to either ignore it, use the flag, and *choose* to go
>   with the option above
> - or they can choose to try meson, get any issues fixed *while still
>   being able to work with their old setup in the mean time*
> 
> This last bit is the entire point of this patch, so let me repeat it:
> people will report meson issues while there's still time to use their
> old autotools setup.
> 
> I'm definitely in favour:
> Acked-by: Eric Engestrom 

Eric's reasoning here makes sense.  In case there is anyone out there
who has been putting off trying Meson, this will properly exhort them
to try it, and identify any problems, yet still let them continue using
their old system for a little while longer.

Acked-by: Kenneth Graunke 

I've been using Meson for a long time, and it is dramatically better to
work with - both to write, and to use.  It is a little bit different,
and that took some getting used to.  But it was absolutely worth it.

We need a way to make progress here.  Matt's concern is very valid -
people can simply keep moving the goal posts.  And that's incredibly
frustrating for the people doing the work.

Given that we've had the Meson build system for over a year, I think
time is up.  Marek once received review feedback to a patch a year after
he wrote it, and he responded with something like "I've moved on, feel
free to write a patch."  I think that applies here.  The Meson build has
had many contributors at this point.  If it's not good enough, feel free
to help fix it.  It's worth noting that it is good enough for the major
distros, which have switched, and a large portion of the community uses
it exclusively.  Dylan has done a ton of work to upstream Meson to
address our needs and improve the usability of the project.  The rest
of the Meson developers have been very responsible as well.  We have
every reason to believe it will keep getting better.

We can't keep kicking the autotools can down the road indefinitely.
We need a forcing function like this patch, then eventual removal.
Expecting new contributors to write 4 build systems is just...bad.
I'm hopeful that we can get down to two (Meson and Android) soon.

For what it's worth, I'm hoping to merge Iris soon, and it does not have
an autotools build system, nor do I intend to write one.  At that point,
you won't be able to build the new Intel OpenGL drivers with autotools.

--Ken


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Ilia Mirkin]

On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 6:24 AM Gert Wollny  wrote:
>
> Since Meson will eventually be the only build system deprecate autotools
> now. It can still be used by invoking configure with the flag
>   --enable-autotools
>
> Signed-off-by: Gert Wollny 

In case it's not clear from the later discussion:

Strongly NAKed-by: Ilia Mirkin 

This should not be applied to the repository.

> ---
> IMO autotools should be properly deprecated prior it its removal, so here
> is a patch to do just that. I think autotools should be marked as deprecated
> for the 19.0 release and, depending on feedback, it could be removed with 
> 19.1.
> Anyway, in the end it's up to the release team how to handle this.
>
> Best,
> Gert
>
>  configure.ac | 13 +
>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
> index 9b437a252c..73f5978bb7 100644
> --- a/configure.ac
> +++ b/configure.ac
> @@ -52,6 +52,19 @@ mingw*)
>  ;;
>  esac
>
> +AC_ARG_ENABLE(autotools,
> +   [AS_HELP_STRING([--enable-autotools],
> +   [Enable the use of this autotools based build 
> configuration])],
> +   [enable_autotools=$enableval], [enable_autotools=no])
> +
> +if test "x$enable_autotools" != "xyes" ; then
> +AC_MSG_ERROR([the autotools build system has been deprecated in favour of
> +meson and will be removed eventually. For instructions on how to use 
> meson
> +see https://www.mesa3d.org/meson.html.
> +If you still want to use the autotools build, then add --enable-autotools
> +to the configure command line.])
> +fi
> +
>  # Support silent build rules, requires at least automake-1.11. Disable
>  # by either passing --disable-silent-rules to configure or passing V=1
>  # to make
> --
> 2.19.2
>
> ___
> mesa-dev mailing list
> mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Ilia Mirkin]

On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 12:15 PM Matt Turner  wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 12:06 PM Ilia Mirkin  wrote:
> > > We're simply trying to get the feedback from users sooner. And the
> > > cost to you is very small: Use an extra flag. It's not a burden.
> >
> > Before the community is happy? Premature. The way you build consensus
> > for a new thing is not by shooting the old thing in the foot. That
> > just encourages me to pick up a shotgun too.
>
> This reply has convinced me that you're not to be reasoned with.

Funny - this is where I'm tending towards with the whole meson effort.
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Matt Turner]

On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 12:06 PM Ilia Mirkin  wrote:
> > We're simply trying to get the feedback from users sooner. And the
> > cost to you is very small: Use an extra flag. It's not a burden.
>
> Before the community is happy? Premature. The way you build consensus
> for a new thing is not by shooting the old thing in the foot. That
> just encourages me to pick up a shotgun too.

This reply has convinced me that you're not to be reasoned with.
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Ilia Mirkin]

On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 11:12 AM Matt Turner  wrote:
> Regardless of all of that, what you're suggesting is only marking
> autotools as deprecated (i.e., this patch) after all known problems
> with the Meson build are fixed. At that point in 3 months down the
> line if we get another bug report from a user that only learned of
> Meson from this patch, you're going to advocate for keeping autotools
> for another release. Rinse, repeat.

It's a multi-step process.

>
> We're simply trying to get the feedback from users sooner. And the
> cost to you is very small: Use an extra flag. It's not a burden.

Before the community is happy? Premature. The way you build consensus
for a new thing is not by shooting the old thing in the foot. That
just encourages me to pick up a shotgun too.

You want something in the final banner that configure prints out about
suggesting users try out meson? Fine by me.

  -ilia
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Ilia Mirkin]

On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 11:03 AM Jason Ekstrand  wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 9:32 AM Ilia Mirkin  wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 10:25 AM Matt Turner  wrote:
>> >
>> > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 8:06 AM Ilia Mirkin  wrote:
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 1:01 AM Matt Turner  wrote:
>> > > > WTF would you have us do?
>> > >
>> > > Same thing as for any change with an impact this wide --
>> > >
>> > > 1. Identify stakeholders. In this case, probably the sub-project
>> > > maintainers, major contributors, and a smattering of distro
>> > > maintainers.
>> > > 2. Make them happy, or at least get them, as a group, to agree that
>> > > it's "good enough".
>> >
>> > So we're trying to get better coverage than what you're suggesting.
>> >
>> > > 3. Apply.
>> > >
>> > > This is the point at which you can make autotools less visible. We're
>> > > not at that point yet.
>> >
>> > Ilia, it's an extra flag. I think you'll survive.
>>
>> It's an advertising strategy for meson (hello world, check this out,
>> it's going to be the default soon). It can be done at the final stage.
>> We're not at that stage.
>>
>> We're at the stage of "hello community, we'd like to replace
>> autotools", and the community coming back to you with feedback.
>
>
> I disagree.  I think we were at that stage 6-8 months ago and a bunch of the 
> community didn't come back with feedback until we sent a patch to delete 
> autotools.  Identify stakeholders?  Done; the distros are all cool with it or 
> have already switched.  Agree it's "good enough"?  We thought we'd done that 
> and then people raised issues at the 11th hour.  Even with those issues, the 
> ones that are real issues with meson are all in-progress to fix.  The others 
> are just "make it look like autotools so I can pretend meson doesn't exist".  
> Please pardon my frustration but we thought we'd done our due diligence and 
> it wasn't until we took a step very much like this one that we actually got 
> feedback from certain people such as yourself.  To say that we're only now 
> getting to the "hello community, we'd like to replace autotools" stage is a 
> bit disingenuous.
>
> That said, that doesn't mean I think this patch is the right way to go.  I 
> think the referenced e-mail conversaion has flushed out enough of the 
> remaining issues that we need to fix a couple of remaining things in meson 
> and then just delete autotools.  Maybe this means that autotools stays around 
> for one more release but then I think we should just can it without bothering 
> with the extra deprecation step.

First -- I want you (and Dylan, and others who are pushing this) to
know that I understand your frustration. Making big changes is a giant
pain. Not only is the change itself difficult (aka 80% of the work),
but then you have to herd all the cats to make it all happen. And cats
don't like to be herded (which is why 20% of the work takes 80% of the
time).

Second -- you're not just getting to "hello community" -- you've been
there for a while. But it's not a signpost to move past (like an
announcement might be), it's a stage to complete. The community has to
be happy. You're saying the concerns are last-second, but I've been
seeing these complaints going on for a while (stuff about saving env
vars, inability to see how you configured something, etc). I was
expecting these would all be addressed before I had to have another
look. And then all of a sudden, "let's drop autotools!" and variants
thereof.

What you've been doing thus far is getting all the yaysayers to be
happy (people who are enthusiastic about the change, such as yourself)
-- making sure it all basically works, etc. Now you have to get the
naysayers to be happy, like me, who are pretty happy with the status
quo, and see limited/no benefit in the change. The way you do that is
to make the new system no worse than the old one. Given that some
people are interested, the naysayers aren't going to just shut it
down, but their concerns should be addressed or ruled invalid.

I've outlined what I'm looking for in a replacement to autotools in
another thread [which you've responded to]. I'd recommend reaching out
to some of the other stakeholders directly and getting their take.
(And perhaps privately in case some fear anything public may affect
their jobs, as I think most stakeholders are employed to contribute to
mesa.)

  -ilia
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Eric Engestrom]

On Wednesday, 2018-12-19 10:32:44 -0500, Ilia Mirkin wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 10:25 AM Matt Turner  wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 8:06 AM Ilia Mirkin  wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 1:01 AM Matt Turner  wrote:
> > > > WTF would you have us do?
> > >
> > > Same thing as for any change with an impact this wide --
> > >
> > > 1. Identify stakeholders. In this case, probably the sub-project
> > > maintainers, major contributors, and a smattering of distro
> > > maintainers.
> > > 2. Make them happy, or at least get them, as a group, to agree that
> > > it's "good enough".
> >
> > So we're trying to get better coverage than what you're suggesting.
> >
> > > 3. Apply.
> > >
> > > This is the point at which you can make autotools less visible. We're
> > > not at that point yet.
> >
> > Ilia, it's an extra flag. I think you'll survive.
> 
> It's an advertising strategy for meson (hello world, check this out,
> it's going to be the default soon). It can be done at the final stage.
> We're not at that stage.
> 
> We're at the stage of "hello community, we'd like to replace
> autotools", and the community coming back to you with feedback.

The point of this patch is for people to not be able to ignore this, and
have to become aware of the existence of Meson and our intention to
remove autotools, whenever this may happen.

Some people have already noticed, probably because they keep up with
mesa-dev@, but the point is that some people haven't.

Without this patch:
- people will continue being unaware, until
- autotools gets removed, and these people are going to try their
  use-cases, and probably find issues
- issues will get fixed, hopefully quickly, but blocking them completely
  in the mean time

With this patch:
- people will *have to notice* that something's changing
- they'll choose to either ignore it, use the flag, and *choose* to go
  with the option above
- or they can choose to try meson, get any issues fixed *while still
  being able to work with their old setup in the mean time*

This last bit is the entire point of this patch, so let me repeat it:
people will report meson issues while there's still time to use their
old autotools setup.

I'm definitely in favour:
Acked-by: Eric Engestrom 
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Matt Turner]

On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 10:32 AM Ilia Mirkin  wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 10:25 AM Matt Turner  wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 8:06 AM Ilia Mirkin  wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 1:01 AM Matt Turner  wrote:
> > > > WTF would you have us do?
> > >
> > > Same thing as for any change with an impact this wide --
> > >
> > > 1. Identify stakeholders. In this case, probably the sub-project
> > > maintainers, major contributors, and a smattering of distro
> > > maintainers.
> > > 2. Make them happy, or at least get them, as a group, to agree that
> > > it's "good enough".
> >
> > So we're trying to get better coverage than what you're suggesting.
> >
> > > 3. Apply.
> > >
> > > This is the point at which you can make autotools less visible. We're
> > > not at that point yet.
> >
> > Ilia, it's an extra flag. I think you'll survive.
>
> It's an advertising strategy for meson (hello world, check this out,
> it's going to be the default soon). It can be done at the final stage.
> We're not at that stage.

It's an attempt to get testing from users that might not know about it
yet. It's not as simple as advertising. If you're confused about the
intention of the patch, consider that it's from Gert who has not been
enthusiastic about removing autotools.

> We're at the stage of "hello community, we'd like to replace
> autotools", and the community coming back to you with feedback.

People have been using Meson quite successfully for more than a year
now. It's now used in Gentoo's mesa ebuild for six months and is used
in the stable version. Your claim is subjective, but I think it's
pretty clear that it's not accurate.

Regardless of all of that, what you're suggesting is only marking
autotools as deprecated (i.e., this patch) after all known problems
with the Meson build are fixed. At that point in 3 months down the
line if we get another bug report from a user that only learned of
Meson from this patch, you're going to advocate for keeping autotools
for another release. Rinse, repeat.

We're simply trying to get the feedback from users sooner. And the
cost to you is very small: Use an extra flag. It's not a burden.
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Jason Ekstrand]

On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 9:32 AM Ilia Mirkin  wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 10:25 AM Matt Turner  wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 8:06 AM Ilia Mirkin 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 1:01 AM Matt Turner 
> wrote:
> > > > WTF would you have us do?
> > >
> > > Same thing as for any change with an impact this wide --
> > >
> > > 1. Identify stakeholders. In this case, probably the sub-project
> > > maintainers, major contributors, and a smattering of distro
> > > maintainers.
> > > 2. Make them happy, or at least get them, as a group, to agree that
> > > it's "good enough".
> >
> > So we're trying to get better coverage than what you're suggesting.
> >
> > > 3. Apply.
> > >
> > > This is the point at which you can make autotools less visible. We're
> > > not at that point yet.
> >
> > Ilia, it's an extra flag. I think you'll survive.
>
> It's an advertising strategy for meson (hello world, check this out,
> it's going to be the default soon). It can be done at the final stage.
> We're not at that stage.
>
> We're at the stage of "hello community, we'd like to replace
> autotools", and the community coming back to you with feedback.
>

I disagree.  I think we were at that stage 6-8 months ago and a bunch of
the community didn't come back with feedback until we sent a patch to
delete autotools.  Identify stakeholders?  Done; the distros are all cool
with it or have already switched.  Agree it's "good enough"?  We thought
we'd done that and then people raised issues at the 11th hour.  Even with
those issues, the ones that are real issues with meson are all in-progress
to fix.  The others are just "make it look like autotools so I can pretend
meson doesn't exist".  Please pardon my frustration but we thought we'd
done our due diligence and it wasn't until we took a step very much like
this one that we actually got feedback from certain people such as
yourself.  To say that we're only now getting to the "hello community, we'd
like to replace autotools" stage is a bit disingenuous.

That said, that doesn't mean I think this patch is the right way to go.  I
think the referenced e-mail conversaion has flushed out enough of the
remaining issues that we need to fix a couple of remaining things in meson
and then just delete autotools.  Maybe this means that autotools stays
around for one more release but then I think we should just can it without
bothering with the extra deprecation step.

--Jason
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Ilia Mirkin]

On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 10:25 AM Matt Turner  wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 8:06 AM Ilia Mirkin  wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 1:01 AM Matt Turner  wrote:
> > > WTF would you have us do?
> >
> > Same thing as for any change with an impact this wide --
> >
> > 1. Identify stakeholders. In this case, probably the sub-project
> > maintainers, major contributors, and a smattering of distro
> > maintainers.
> > 2. Make them happy, or at least get them, as a group, to agree that
> > it's "good enough".
>
> So we're trying to get better coverage than what you're suggesting.
>
> > 3. Apply.
> >
> > This is the point at which you can make autotools less visible. We're
> > not at that point yet.
>
> Ilia, it's an extra flag. I think you'll survive.

It's an advertising strategy for meson (hello world, check this out,
it's going to be the default soon). It can be done at the final stage.
We're not at that stage.

We're at the stage of "hello community, we'd like to replace
autotools", and the community coming back to you with feedback.

  -ilia
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Matt Turner]

On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 8:06 AM Ilia Mirkin  wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 1:01 AM Matt Turner  wrote:
> > WTF would you have us do?
>
> Same thing as for any change with an impact this wide --
>
> 1. Identify stakeholders. In this case, probably the sub-project
> maintainers, major contributors, and a smattering of distro
> maintainers.
> 2. Make them happy, or at least get them, as a group, to agree that
> it's "good enough".

So we're trying to get better coverage than what you're suggesting.

> 3. Apply.
>
> This is the point at which you can make autotools less visible. We're
> not at that point yet.

Ilia, it's an extra flag. I think you'll survive.
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Ilia Mirkin]

On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 1:01 AM Matt Turner  wrote:
> WTF would you have us do?

Same thing as for any change with an impact this wide --

1. Identify stakeholders. In this case, probably the sub-project
maintainers, major contributors, and a smattering of distro
maintainers.
2. Make them happy, or at least get them, as a group, to agree that
it's "good enough".
3. Apply.

This is the point at which you can make autotools less visible. We're
not at that point yet.

  -ilia
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Matt Turner]

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 6:53 PM Ilia Mirkin  wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 6:40 PM Gert Wollny  wrote:
> >
> > Hi Ilia,
> >
> > Am Sonntag, den 16.12.2018, 12:40 -0500 schrieb Ilia Mirkin:
> > > On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 6:24 AM Gert Wollny 
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Since Meson will eventually be the only build system deprecate
> > > > autotools
> > > > now. It can still be used by invoking configure with the flag
> > > >   --enable-autotools
> > > >
> >
> > [...]
> > > If the concern is that there are 2 build systems and it's unclear
> > > which to use, I'd definitely err on the side of making meson the one
> > > requiring extra hoops to jump through.
> > >
> >
> > I think Jason already pointed out that this patch doesn't remove
> > anything. If you have followed the threads you've seen that I'm also
> > not exactly pushing for removing autotools, but I think since it is
> > going to happen anyway, it would be best to give everyone a little more
> > incentive to try out meson so that hopefully all the remaining issue
> > are brought up and can be fixed, before autotools is removed in a
> > stable release.
>
> Yeah, I totally see that you're not removing autotools with this
> patch. I do see that you're making it harder to use though (i.e.
> indicating to users that it's not the #1 way to do things). This
> should only be done when it's ready to be deprecated. The argument
> I've been making is that it's not. I've outlined some things that I
> think are important to fix in meson in another thread.

You've said Meson's not ready given X, Y, and Z use cases. I've noted
that some of those use cases were not reported earlier because the
users had not given Meson a try until we began discussing removing
autotools. This patch attempts to simply inform a larger group of
users that are not subscribed to mesa-dev@ that the intention is for
autotools to be removed.

Dylan is working to fix X, Y, and Z, but there's a reasonable chance
that a user who wasn't subscribed to mesa-dev@ might find problems A,
B, and C only after he's forced to switch to Meson. This patch is the
only thing that's been proposed so far to communicate with those
users. Without some required interaction on the users part we will
fail to communicate with some users and we'll be right back where we
are now.

WTF would you have us do?
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Ilia Mirkin]

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 6:40 PM Gert Wollny  wrote:
>
> Hi Ilia,
>
> Am Sonntag, den 16.12.2018, 12:40 -0500 schrieb Ilia Mirkin:
> > On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 6:24 AM Gert Wollny 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Since Meson will eventually be the only build system deprecate
> > > autotools
> > > now. It can still be used by invoking configure with the flag
> > >   --enable-autotools
> > >
>
> [...]
> > If the concern is that there are 2 build systems and it's unclear
> > which to use, I'd definitely err on the side of making meson the one
> > requiring extra hoops to jump through.
> >
>
> I think Jason already pointed out that this patch doesn't remove
> anything. If you have followed the threads you've seen that I'm also
> not exactly pushing for removing autotools, but I think since it is
> going to happen anyway, it would be best to give everyone a little more
> incentive to try out meson so that hopefully all the remaining issue
> are brought up and can be fixed, before autotools is removed in a
> stable release.

Yeah, I totally see that you're not removing autotools with this
patch. I do see that you're making it harder to use though (i.e.
indicating to users that it's not the #1 way to do things). This
should only be done when it's ready to be deprecated. The argument
I've been making is that it's not. I've outlined some things that I
think are important to fix in meson in another thread.

Cheers,

  -ilia
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Gert Wollny]

Hi Ilia, 

Am Sonntag, den 16.12.2018, 12:40 -0500 schrieb Ilia Mirkin:
> On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 6:24 AM Gert Wollny 
> wrote:
> > 
> > Since Meson will eventually be the only build system deprecate
> > autotools
> > now. It can still be used by invoking configure with the flag
> >   --enable-autotools
> > 

[...]
> If the concern is that there are 2 build systems and it's unclear
> which to use, I'd definitely err on the side of making meson the one
> requiring extra hoops to jump through.
> 

I think Jason already pointed out that this patch doesn't remove
anything. If you have followed the threads you've seen that I'm also
not exactly pushing for removing autotools, but I think since it is
going to happen anyway, it would be best to give everyone a little more
incentive to try out meson so that hopefully all the remaining issue
are brought up and can be fixed, before autotools is removed in a
stable release. 

In any case, I wouldn't want to push this patch before [1] is fixed so
that one can indeed upgrade meson without having to manually redo the
configuration. 

Best, 
Gert 

[1] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109071

___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Jason Ekstrand]

On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 11:40 AM Ilia Mirkin  wrote:

> On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 6:24 AM Gert Wollny  wrote:
> >
> > Since Meson will eventually be the only build system deprecate autotools
> > now. It can still be used by invoking configure with the flag
> >   --enable-autotools
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Gert Wollny 
> > ---
> > IMO autotools should be properly deprecated prior it its removal, so here
> > is a patch to do just that. I think autotools should be marked as
> deprecated
> > for the 19.0 release and, depending on feedback, it could be removed
> with 19.1.
> > Anyway, in the end it's up to the release team how to handle this.
>
> I think too many usability issues are left over in meson to make it
> the recommended build system, and remove the system that everyone
> knows how to use. If people want to use meson that's fine, but a
> number of concerns have been surfaced which make it currently
> unsuitable. I plan on doing a longer write-up covering some of the
> things I've mentioned in the past along with some new ones.
>

This patch doesn't remove anything, it just changes the recommendation and
annoys people who use autotools.  Unless I've missed something, all of the
issues stated so far have been usability annoyances having to do with
re-building.  Nothing remains which prevents you from building the project
and some user who comes along randomly and wants to build mesa should be
able to use meson just fine.


> If the concern is that there are 2 build systems and it's unclear
> which to use, I'd definitely err on the side of making meson the one
> requiring extra hoops to jump through.
>

Right now, we have a chicken and egg problem.  Dylan has worked like crazy
to solve the blocking issues and, at this point, mesa is buildable with
meson in more-or-less all the configurations as autotools allows.  What
remains are a few useability issues.  The only way we'll solve those issues
is if people try meson and report them.  Given that most of the excited
early adopters are now pretty happy with it, what remains is to solve the
useability issues of those less excited.  As long as meson remains an
optional thing and autotools safe for the indefinite future, those less
excited will continue to ignore meson, use autotools, and not have their
problems solved.  As long as people insist on meson being deprecated until
100% of the issues are solved, the people trying to make meson happen have
a moving target and we'll keep running around in circles forever.  I don't
know how to move things forward without somehow forcing the issue a bit.  I
think Dylan's e-mail was reasonably effective at flushing out some of those
issues; this patch just goes a bit further.

I'm not trying to belittle the issues you've had in any way.  However,
we've had the meson build system in the works for over a year now and some
of us have been using almost nothing else for the 8 or 10 months of that.
The fact that some of these issues are just now surfacing is a bit
disappointing.  What we need is a concrete point at which we can declare
meson good enough and get rid of the legacy system.  Previously, Dylan and
the rest had been working under the assumption that the relevant milestone
was the ability to build mesa on Linux with all the same combinations as
were supported by autotools minus the couple which we decided to drop.
That milestone has been achieved.  Some of the feedback we heard on the
previous e-mail thread was that that isn't sufficient.  That's fine but the
question remains, what is sufficient?  It would be helpful if, along with
your list of issues, you would provide an indication of what you think the
"good enough" point is.

--Jason
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Matt Turner]

On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 6:24 AM Gert Wollny  wrote:
>
> Since Meson will eventually be the only build system deprecate autotools
> now. It can still be used by invoking configure with the flag
>   --enable-autotools
>
> Signed-off-by: Gert Wollny 
> ---
> IMO autotools should be properly deprecated prior it its removal, so here
> is a patch to do just that. I think autotools should be marked as deprecated
> for the 19.0 release and, depending on feedback, it could be removed with 
> 19.1.
> Anyway, in the end it's up to the release team how to handle this.
>
> Best,
> Gert
>
>  configure.ac | 13 +
>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
> index 9b437a252c..73f5978bb7 100644
> --- a/configure.ac
> +++ b/configure.ac
> @@ -52,6 +52,19 @@ mingw*)
>  ;;
>  esac
>
> +AC_ARG_ENABLE(autotools,
> +   [AS_HELP_STRING([--enable-autotools],
> +   [Enable the use of this autotools based build 
> configuration])],
> +   [enable_autotools=$enableval], [enable_autotools=no])
> +
> +if test "x$enable_autotools" != "xyes" ; then
> +AC_MSG_ERROR([the autotools build system has been deprecated in favour of
> +meson and will be removed eventually. For instructions on how to use 
> meson
> +see https://www.mesa3d.org/meson.html.
> +If you still want to use the autotools build, then add --enable-autotools
> +to the configure command line.])
> +fi
> +

Fine by me.

Reviewed-by: Matt Turner 
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Ilia Mirkin]

On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 6:24 AM Gert Wollny  wrote:
>
> Since Meson will eventually be the only build system deprecate autotools
> now. It can still be used by invoking configure with the flag
>   --enable-autotools
>
> Signed-off-by: Gert Wollny 
> ---
> IMO autotools should be properly deprecated prior it its removal, so here
> is a patch to do just that. I think autotools should be marked as deprecated
> for the 19.0 release and, depending on feedback, it could be removed with 
> 19.1.
> Anyway, in the end it's up to the release team how to handle this.

I think too many usability issues are left over in meson to make it
the recommended build system, and remove the system that everyone
knows how to use. If people want to use meson that's fine, but a
number of concerns have been surfaced which make it currently
unsuitable. I plan on doing a longer write-up covering some of the
things I've mentioned in the past along with some new ones.

If the concern is that there are 2 build systems and it's unclear
which to use, I'd definitely err on the side of making meson the one
requiring extra hoops to jump through.

Cheers,

  -ilia
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [PATCH] autotools: Deprecate the use of autotools

[Gert Wollny]

Since Meson will eventually be the only build system deprecate autotools
now. It can still be used by invoking configure with the flag
  --enable-autotools

Signed-off-by: Gert Wollny 
---
IMO autotools should be properly deprecated prior it its removal, so here 
is a patch to do just that. I think autotools should be marked as deprecated 
for the 19.0 release and, depending on feedback, it could be removed with 19.1.
Anyway, in the end it's up to the release team how to handle this. 

Best,
Gert

 configure.ac | 13 +
 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)

diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
index 9b437a252c..73f5978bb7 100644
--- a/configure.ac
+++ b/configure.ac
@@ -52,6 +52,19 @@ mingw*)
 ;;
 esac
 
+AC_ARG_ENABLE(autotools,
+   [AS_HELP_STRING([--enable-autotools],
+   [Enable the use of this autotools based build 
configuration])],
+   [enable_autotools=$enableval], [enable_autotools=no])
+
+if test "x$enable_autotools" != "xyes" ; then
+AC_MSG_ERROR([the autotools build system has been deprecated in favour of
+meson and will be removed eventually. For instructions on how to use meson
+see https://www.mesa3d.org/meson.html.
+If you still want to use the autotools build, then add --enable-autotools
+to the configure command line.])
+fi
+
 # Support silent build rules, requires at least automake-1.11. Disable
 # by either passing --disable-silent-rules to configure or passing V=1
 # to make
-- 
2.19.2

___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev