[OpenAFS-devel] Re: adding "make check" to build slaves

Jason Edgecombe jason@rampaginggeek.com
Thu, 12 Apr 2012 21:36:12 -0400


On 04/12/2012 08:20 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Jason Edgecombe<jason@rampaginggeek.com>  writes:
>> On 04/12/2012 02:34 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
>>> runtests itself assumes that something else will handle this, since for
>>> all of my other projects I use libtool.  OpenAFS is somewhat unique
>>> among projects using that test driver at the moment in its reinvention
>>> of that wheel.  (For reasons that I understand; libtool has its bugs
>>> too, of course.  But this is something that it normally handles
>>> reasonably well with current versions.)
>> is there a reason why we shouldn't use libtool? licensing perhaps?
> I believe that we should use both Libtool and Automake, but the amount of
> work required for a transition is immense, and will also require working
> with the upstreams of both projects to resolve bugs.  OpenAFS is more
> broadly portable than a lot of free software, and has some interesting and
> special build system challenges (such as the separate build of kernel
> modules).
>
> I've looked at doing this incrementally a few times, as have other people,
> but it's a very difficult change to make incrementally, and the amount of
> effort required is daunting.  It's generally far easier to make
> incremental improvements to our current ad hoc arrangement of shell
> scripts with portability testing on the platforms we know we care about.
>
> Given current available development cycles and current development
> priorities, I think this sort of build system transition is unlikely to
> ever happen.
>

Here is my first crack at a libwrap script. Feedback is welcome:
http://gerrit.openafs.org/7202

Thanks,
Jason