[weston, v2, 17/17] configure: add an option to allow building only the libraries

[Giulio Camuffo]

2015-05-16 7:43 GMT+03:00 Bryce Harrington <bryce at osg.samsung.com>:
> On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 09:27:38AM +0300, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
>> On Sat, 9 May 2015 10:09:21 +0300
>> Giulio Camuffo <giuliocamuffo at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > 2015-05-09 3:15 GMT+03:00 Bryce Harrington <bryce at osg.samsung.com>:
>> > > On Thu, Dec 04, 2014 at 11:01:23PM +0200, Giulio Camuffo wrote:
>> > >> the --enable/disable-weston-binaries emable or disable the creation
>> > >> of the 'weston', 'weston-launch' and all the binaries that are
>> > >> installed in $prefix/lib/libexec. This allows, together with
>> > >> --enable-clients, to only build the libraries, making possible to
>> > >> build and install different libweston versions at the same time.
>> > >
>> > > Prior to 1.7 there was uncertainty whether to have a libweston.  Since
>> > > then, the uncertainty has gone away and it sounds like we're now all
>> > > more or less in consensus favoring this change?
>> > >
>> > > However, this patchset hasn't yet landed, and there's still some
>> > > questions about specifics.
>> > >
>> > > Should we press ahead with an eye towards getting this landed for 1.8?
>> > > Or should we postpone and target landing it as soon as the 1.9 tree
>> > > opens?
>> >
>> > I don't think it'd make sense to push it into 1.8 now, it is a rather
>> > big change and may introduce regressions. 1.9 seems a better idea
>> > imho.
>>
>> Yeah, it is far far too late for 1.8.
>>
>> This is such a big change, that it would be better to land it early in
>> a development cycle, like before the mid-point to the next alpha. That
>> would give us more experience on how it works, and if there are
>> problems, we should have time to fix them properly.
>
> Okay, in this case Guilio, in the next couple weeks can you rebase this
> to trunk (hopefully there's not a huge amount changed) and re-propose it
> on the mailing list?  Hopefully as things are stabilized for the release
> we shouldn't see much changing in the repo.

Sure. Actually my branch on github is already on top of master, or almost.


--
Giulio

>
> Then, once 1.9 is open we can proceed with getting it landed first thing.
>
> We will also require tests and API documentation.
>
> Bryce