From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out2.smtp.messagingengine.com (out2.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB98DE00305 for ; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 12:49:05 -0800 (PST) Authentication-Results: yocto-www.yoctoproject.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; insecure key) header.i=@messagingengine.com; x-dkim-adsp=none (insecure policy) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.mail.srv.osa [10.202.2.44]) by gateway1.nyi.mail.srv.osa (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0E55200D1 for ; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 15:49:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from frontend2.nyi.mail.srv.osa ([10.202.2.161]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 14 Nov 2011 15:49:03 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to :references:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:message-id :mime-version; s=smtpout; bh=PSV9L6+urvJJaYdikEiKKP9Z2ME=; b=ZsB x7Jm86eZl9GlXSpbZgr3EfhTUpe7434R9/SnTtMw6eRg97jrcclQA7OGGDggKvSf oixv8siBBxLbBumZRbUgkJk169pz/azHlj3y0XER4rPbMALp+HoH+t2OYyGqLXAG 7xLSbi2hZq7F2yJzk7PBiZHLFGNC0i8wVNViD8U0= X-Sasl-enc: FEHYrudAkGBTNsKtZ4JJl/3JIYWP74dubMhWyguhrZau 1321303743 Received: from [192.168.1.6] (c-65-96-172-131.hsd1.ma.comcast.net [65.96.172.131]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id BAB7248250F; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 15:49:03 -0500 (EST) From: Colin Walters To: Richard Purdie Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 15:48:36 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1321300592.26881.71.camel@ted> References: <1321145853.14976.12.camel@lenny> <1321177671.26881.44.camel@ted> <1321297575.1741.4.camel@lenny> <1321300592.26881.71.camel@ted> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.0.3 (3.0.3-1.fc15) Message-ID: <1321303717.1741.9.camel@lenny> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: poky@yoctoproject.org Subject: Re: non-upstreamed patches X-BeenThere: poky@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Poky build system developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 20:49:06 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 19:56 +0000, Richard Purdie wrote: > The number of people who write cross safe autogen.sh scripts which do > everything we need is unfortunately low. Can you elaborate on this? What are some common cross-unsafe problems? So concretely here with gtk-doc, since we don't actually want to build the documentation (because gtk-doc is native only for the exact same reasons gobject-introspection is, and we've talked about that one). The GNOME autogen.sh scripts will run "gtkdocize", which pretty much just copies in gtk-doc.make and gtk-doc.m4. We could reimplement that with dummy copies, or build a lobotomized gtk-doc (this will require perl-native but that's about it I think). I'm experimenting with this now. > I do appreciate the gnome > community may do better than others and things are improving over time. > I'd not yet at a point where I'd trust even 10% of the autogen.sh > scripts out there though. The other thing we could do I guess is make it opt-in, like OE_RUN_AUTOGEN=1 or something in individual recipes using autotools.bbclass?