2011/1/18 Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger@xxxxxxxxx>: > +1 to FPC blessing. ÂLike I said, we can probably carve up something that > explains both the waf POV and configure scripts here... but it'll need > someone who knows waf to be able to explain, for instance, how waf differs > from autoconf which has both a non-bundled and non-bundled component. In theory, it's not complicated at all: you have a binary (+ its library) and you have rule files describing the build process, build options and variants, checking prerequisites, etc... within your project. So in theory, no need to bundle waf and the lib together with your project [*]. In practice however waf versions seem to differ enough to cause build problems if not done with the exact same waf version the wscripts are developed against. So, it's neither waf is a copylib, nor is it like autotools (in that it generates scripts). The exception FPC to ask for is simply because it makes things easier. Multiple waf packages would be needed in parallel, and extensive testing for each package that BRs it. Much effort for no real gain. - Thomas [*] There is a small possibility projects use a patched version of waf. Not sure if that's really the case for any package in Fedora. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
