Meson vs. automake/autoconf

[tlaronde at kergis.com]

On Mon, Feb 05, 2024 at 01:36:56PM -0800, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> On 2/5/24 12:45, tlaronde at kergis.com wrote:
> > I'm continuing my review and I'm now looking at libxcb and xcbproto.
> > 
> > Is there a goal set to switch from auto* tools to meson/ninja for the
> > maximum of projects?
> 
> Yes - that's our overall direction, but progress is going slowly.  There
> is some though - if you look at the postings from the past few days on
> https://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-announce/2024-February/thread.html
> you'll see libpciaccess dropped the autoconf files altogether after
> having a previous release with both, and libxkbfile & libXvMC both
> had their first releases with meson added and announcing plans to
> drop autoconf in the future.
> 

OK. (I will subscribe to xorg-announce too...)

> > Since I have to untangle things for my own built framework, I may as
> > well provide meson files (that are undoubtely more readable than the
> > auto* dance) when I am at it...
> 
> That'd be nice.  You should be able to find a number of examples of
> how we've set up the .gitlab-ci.yaml files to build with both methods
> when both are present and test that the expected combinations work.

OK. So for others, I take for now (for the meson stuff) xcbproto and libxcb.

Note: I have a huge, urgent, development process going for business purposes,
so I work on this Xorg task only when I have a slot. No news will not mean that
I have dropped it or that it takes _this_ amount of time.
-- 
        Thierry Laronde <tlaronde +AT+ kergis +dot+ com>
                     http://www.kergis.com/
                    http://kertex.kergis.com/
Key fingerprint = 0FF7 E906 FBAF FE95 FD89  250D 52B1 AE95 6006 F40C