[PATCH] build: always build wayland-scanner

[Derek Foreman]

On 03/07/15 10:06 AM, Burton, Ross wrote:
> On 3 July 2015 at 15:50, Derek Foreman <derekf at osg.samsung.com
> <mailto:derekf at osg.samsung.com>> wrote:
> 
>     On 01/07/15 04:51 PM, Ross Burton wrote:
>     > The previous idiom for building a cross-compiled Wayland is to build once for
>     > the build host (with --enable-scanner --disable-libraries) to get a
>     > wayland-scanner binary that can then be used in a cross-compile (with
>     > --disable-scanner).  The problem with this is that the cross wayland is missing
>     > a wayland-scanner binary, which means you then can't do any Wayland development
>     > on the target.
>     >
>     > Instead, always build wayland-scanner for the target and change
> 
>     What if I don't need wayland-scanner (or any of its pre-requisites) for
>     my target arch?  If I'm building a system image for deployment I won't
>     have any need for wayland-scanner on it.
> 
> 
> It's a very quick build and the pre-requisities are "expat".  We're
> packaging wayland-scanner into wayland-dev so for a non-development
> system you don't have it installed.

What's the benefit in forcing everyone to build wayland-scanner?  Right
now it's not required.  Is there actually a reason this ability must be
broken to add the functionality you want?

> 
>     > --enable/disable-scanner to --with/without-host-scanner.  Normal builds use the
>     > default of --without-host-scanner and run the wayland-scanner it just built, and
>     > cross-compiled builds pass --with-host-scanner to use a previously built host
>     > scanner but still get a wayland-scanner to install.
> 
>     I guess I'm not strictly opposed to being able to specify a host scanner
>     location... I know Tizen builds figure it out from .pc files.  If you
>     don't have that capability won't you have trouble building pretty much
>     anything else for your target architecture?
> 
> 
> You don't tell it a path, this keeps the current behaviour of "it's on
> $PATH".
>
>     > (a theoretically neater solution would be to build two scanners if required (one
>     > to run and one to install), but automake makes this overly complicated)
> 
>     Building host and target architectures out of the same tree?  sounds
>     quite difficult to get right and probably not worth the effort.
> 
> 
> Quite easy actually, but you need to disable subdir-objects.  I have a
> patch and ignoring a new autotools macro file from autotools-archive
> it's a net reduction in build system LoC.
> 
> Ross 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> wayland-devel mailing list
> wayland-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
>