Re: would it be time to replace scons with meson build system?

[Christian Gagneraud]

On Wed, 5 Feb 2020 at 17:49, Eric S. Raymond <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> Greg Troxel <address@hidden>:
> > Chris Kuethe <address@hidden> writes:
> >
> > > You might get better feedback if you were to do up a set of
> > > patches/PRs that are easy to test, and include some test results, eg.
> > > does this work out of the box on older embedded linux, on macos, on
> > > freebsd/netbsd/openbsd, on raspberry pi, illumos... ? Probably a lot
> > > of us here have the latest version of our preferred linux distribution
> > > running on x86_64, but we don't want to prevent nice platform-agnostic
> > > C code from running on any mostly posix environment because the build
> > > system only understands i686 and x86_64 linux. (See wintel, or
> > > vaxocentrism - http://catb.org/jargon/html/V/vaxocentrism.html)
> > >
> > > And also help us to understand exactly what benefits the new build
> > > system offers.
> >
> > A fair point.
> >
> > scons feels like it is diffficult to deal with, and that it is starting
> > to be used by very few projects.
> >
> > SConstruct has 2345 non-comment non-blank lines.   I think that makes it
> > difficult to deal with.
>
> I might not have made this clear before. I am willing for scons to be
> replaced.  It was my choice originally, and I still think a good choice given
> that we couldn't know the future - but it has stagnated.
>
> I don't have any opiniomn about what to replace it with, other than
> *not autoconf*.

Have you guys heard of Qbs?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qbs_(build_tool)

Chris

> --
>                 <a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond</a>
>
>
>