From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnout Vandecappelle Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2017 22:38:39 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 0/3] Add support for Meson build In-Reply-To: References: <20170727094528.10745-1-joerg.krause@embedded.rocks> <866e116f-f9be-f138-4055-8ffe94ad2d19@imgtec.com> <1501150411.21202.1.camel@embedded.rocks> <20170727165026.4a5f59a1@windsurf.lan> <20171007135843.5a75c7f5@windsurf.home> <7d11c269-d453-6066-e6f1-2f68dd4b81d3@smile.fr> Message-ID: <8186cfc2-f587-8d35-2560-2f2f314a186d@mind.be> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net On 11-10-17 05:51, Andrey Yurovsky wrote: > Hi, > > On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 6:06 AM, Romain Naour wrote: >> Thomas, Andrey, All, >> >> Le 07/10/2017 ? 13:58, Thomas Petazzoni a ?crit : >>> Hello, >>> >>> On Fri, 6 Oct 2017 15:39:03 -0700, Andrey Yurovsky wrote: >>> >>>> On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 7:50 AM, Thomas Petazzoni >>>> wrote: >>>>> No, let's wait to have a few Meson-based packages in Buildroot, and >>>>> then we'll have a package infrastructure. This will allow us to see >>>>> what are the commonalities, what are the differences, etc. >>>> >>>> systemd 235 is released (https://lwn.net/Articles/735691/) and it >>>> drops autoconf/automake and only has meson as the build system (in 234 >>>> they warned this would happen next) so perhaps that's a good starting >>>> point for buildroot to integrate meson support? I'm happy to help out >>>> if no one else was already working on it. >>> >>> This would indeed be a very compelling reason to support meson. >> >> Also the next enlightenment release (0.22) will only support meson. >> > > I was able to add a package/pkg-meson.mk wrapper (that seems to be > missing from the Meson patch set, or did I completely miss it?) and Yes, our original idea was that there should be a few packages using meson before we add an infra for it. But since there are quite a few packages that will use the meson infra, and since it seems pretty straightforward, it can indeed be done right away (at least according to me, Thomas may have a different opinion). > built the previously submitted libmpdclient version bump via the > $(eval $(meson-package)) wrapper. I'll work on version bumping systemd > and converting it to use that wrapper as well. If possible I'd like to > get this more or less right, what would a reasonable patch set look > like? I was thinking, as a patch set: > 1. resubmit the Meson patches (package/meson, documentation) by J?rg Krause If you're anyway adding pkg-meson.mk, then the documentation doesn't make much sense (in that form). Better do it after pkg-meson.mk. > 2. add package/pkg-meson.mk > 3. resubmit the libmpdclient version bump patch by J?rg Krause but > with $(eval $(meson-package)) changes > 4. submit the systemd version bump and meson conversion patch(es) > > That way we have the infrastructure, documentation, and two packages > utilizing the infrastructure in one set to review. Does that sound > alright? Yes it does! Regards, Arnout -- Arnout Vandecappelle arnout at mind be Senior Embedded Software Architect +32-16-286500 Essensium/Mind http://www.mind.be G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle GPG fingerprint: 7493 020B C7E3 8618 8DEC 222C 82EB F404 F9AC 0DDF