[Clam-devel] Re: Windows native compilation

[Giulio Paci]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

David García Garzón ha scritto:

> On Dilluns 05 Maig 2008, Giulio Paci wrote:
>> Hi to all!
>>
>>     I'm happy that You're working on Windows native compilation again.
>>
>> While working on this task last time, I was wondering why not to use
>> autoconf+automake
>> instead of scons. Looking to this mailing list in the past year it
>> seems to me that working
>> with scons required too much patches.
>>
>> In my opinion using autoconf+automake would simplify a lot the project
>> administration,
>> the cross platform compilation and the implementation of new features
>> (i.e.: distcc feature
>> comes for free).
>>
>> So why don't give autoconf+automake a try?
>
> Giulio, we come from there. Autotools was a hell for us. We switched to
scons
> and now everybody understand the lib testing code just with a little of
> python. Current scripts are so complex because their legacy from the
> autotools/makefile ones we had and because there are a lot of
VisualCisms we
> are to drop. I think we currently can simplify a lot the scons scripts
and we
> can do that because anyone can understand them and find a simpler way of
> doing such tests.
Ok this is a good point. Because as all of You already know python it's
easier for You to work with scons than autoconf. Anyway I think that
using autoconf+automake is much easier, once well understood.
I think also that a great problem of autoconf is the lack of a good
"starting guide", that makes very difficult for newbie to understand
the project management system. Moreover it requires much more
knowledge that just python: for Your project You will need at least
some basic m4 knowledge (You're using some libraries that requires
test not yet handled by autoconf macros) and make knowledge.
In general it will require bash, and autoconf+automake knowledge.
But I think that a well designed autoconf project, doesn't require more
than automake (and sometimes autoconf) understanding.
> We are not going to drop scons. It has simplified our build system a
lot and
> it will simplify it even more. Autotools back to CLAM is a no-no unless
you
> write an autotools script for CLAM that everybody could understand and,
more
> imporant, that everybody could debug.
I think this is possible. And I think that this is an easy task too.
But, as I've said, autoconf system requires some more knowledge than
scons, and I'm not going to maintain this project and that is why I've
offered my help to guide someone to the autoconf files creation and
I've not offered directly the autoconf files.

Anyway if You like scons, I'm glad to help for native windows compile
with scons as my (very few) time permits.

Cheers,
    Giulio.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFIHxmefBsixEOxq7ARAsR5AJ9PuPa0Zy4AysuAsNit7qMSZOTf8wCggVXD
cDi1X7ut5CIK+/4HxBJcWS4=
=aWQL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: giuliopaci.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 180 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.clam-project.org/pipermail/clam-devel-clam-project.org/attachments/20080505/eb7bd184/attachment-0003.vcf>