[Clam-devel] Re: Windows native compilation

[David García Garzón]

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.

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. But I think that such an effort could 
be better targeted to any of the many CLAM open fronts.


-- 
David García Garzón
(Work) dgarcia at iua dot upf anotherdot es
http://www.iua.upf.edu/~dgarcia
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.clam-project.org/pipermail/clam-devel-clam-project.org/attachments/20080505/0540db16/attachment-0001.sig>