Hey Peter, On 7 December 2016 at 22:33, Peter Hutterer <peter.hutte...@who-t.net> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 04:59:39PM +0000, Daniel Stone wrote: >> [meson is like totally super duper] > > I tried the same for libinput, work available in > https://github.com/whot/libinput/tree/wip/meson > I think I'm about 80% of the way there, with more testing needed and a few > details being different/missing.
Neat! I think you need to filter the compiler flags list with cc.has_argument() to work everywhere - but this is true of Wayland/Weston as well. You could also replace the has_paired_device() check with cc.has_function('libwacom_has_paired_device', dependencies: dep_libwacom). 0.36.0 also lets you get rid of some of the more ugly '@0@/bar'.format(foo) with join_paths(foo, '/bar') instead. I'm going to update Wayland/Weston to make use of this include_directories('.') for libinput shouldn't be needed - I assume this is just there to pick up libinput-version.h, which you can do instead by adding libinput_version_h to the libinput sources list. Are you sure this generates the right soversion for libinput? It looks like you've got args from libtool's -version-info (something I never quite managed to figure out), whereas Meson just takes the soversion directly (a la libtool -version-number). The rest looks good to me! > benchmark results are below, but they're more limited than the weston one. > Running the test suite as part of the build process is pointless as it can > easily take half an hour. There's only one make clean/rebuild we have to > worry about unlike weston's multiple rebuild types. > > It's a bit apples to oranges because I opted for a single meson.build file > instead of the current recursive automake, so some of the speedup is likely > caused by that. Documentation build is currently missing, but that's just a > doxygen run. If anyone wants to run the numbers on different machines please > do so, I just ran it with JOBS=4 on my T440s, i7-4600U CPU @ 2.10GHz, 12GB > RAM, make -j4. I re-ran with -j8 but the numbers were almost identical > anyway. Flat vs. multiple files makes no difference for Meson. Weston distributes it into multiple files, but they all land in one build.ninja file anyway. > Aside from the faster build times, meson's language feels a lot cleaner than > autotools. I'm generally opposed to non-recursive Makefiles because they get > messy, I didn't mind it here. So I'd be quite ok with switching to meson > (after some more testing of course). Great. :) It'll probably be another week / few days before I get to respin the Meson work, as I want to get atomic (+ lots of other stuff on top) v2 out first. But it's really neat! Glad you liked it. Cheers, Daniel _______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel