Re: Master branch now requires liborcus 0.5.0 or higher.

On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 5:55 AM, Bjoern Michaelsen <
bjoern.michaelsen@canonical.com> wrote:

> Hi Kohei,
>
> On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 02:46:33AM -0400, Kohei Yoshida wrote:
> > FYI, I've updated liborcus on the master branch just now. You now need
> > liborcus 0.5.0 or higher in order to build.  It took me 2 days just to
> > integrate this piece, but I've ensured that it builds both on Linux and
> > Windows. So hopefully no major build issues.
>
> You mentioned some trouble with the build system on Windows elsewhere and I
> assume it was about this one. Could you elaborate on that? Did the trouble
> stem
> from gbuild itself, from our use of cygwin or from MSVC particularities?

I'd say gbuild itself, compounded by some regular build breakage related to
ccache (particular if you use a combination of gcc-wrapper with ccache
directly specified in CC and CXX environment variables), and the very weird
handling of DLL's by MSVC.  The slow build process on Windows didn't make
the whole experience any better.

But you need to understand that this whole frustration of mine comes from
my "emotional" self, not my logical self. And I've been on this list long
enough to know that what typically follows after such an emotional venting
post is normally some "logical" reasoning on why things are how they are,
and my "logical" self understands that there is no solution for this.  So,
I'd rather not try to "improve" the situation which would likely not go
anywhere and/or only create more work on others.

Having said that, if I were to point out one major concern with the current
build system is that we are creating so many layers of abstractions,
indirections just to make the system more "elegant" that, it's becoming
increasing hard for non-build system experts to do anything non-trivial.
So, for a non-build system expert such as myself, the choices are either 1)
don't do anything non-trivial, such as integrating an external library into
the build, or 2) become a build expert yourself.


> BTW, this seems like a prime example benefitting from "upload to gerrit,
> let
> someone schudule a test build on all platforms" -- any reason you skipped
> that?

Skipped?  I don't use gerrit for things that need to be done right away. So
it wasn't even an option.  I needed that to be done right away so that I
could move on to doing other things which depended on it. Putting that up
on gerrit and wait for a few days or more was never an option for this.
Plus, the whole feature branch needed to be merged, which isn't a typical
use case for gerrit review system anyway.

Kohei