[gnutls-devel] GnuTLS | consider using an alternative build system (#320)

[Development of GNU's TLS library]

Tim Rühsen commented:


Timings here (AMD 5 3600):
```
1m13  ./bootstrap
0m4,5 ./configure --disable-doc
0m13  make -j$(nproc)
```

The problem with meson (and cmake) seems to be gnulib integration. `./bootstrap + meson + ninja` seems to be appropriate. But really, even if meson takes 0 seconds - you save 4.5 seconds. Ninja will likely also take around 13s (or more). Meson needs python3 and python3 is a huge dependency. Also, how often do you execute `./bootstrap` ? I do this very rarely - e.g. when modifying `bootstrap.conf`. To just re-create  `configure.ac` you can use `autoreconf -fi`. To re-create Makefiles, use `./config.status`.

One of my projects, `libpsl` got meson build support. It still needs `./configure` to create `meson.build` from `meson.build.in`. There still is this comment:
```
# FIXME: Cleanup this when Meson gets 'feature-combo':
# https://github.com/mesonbuild/meson/issues/4566
# Dependency fallbacks would help too:
# https://github.com/mesonbuild/meson/pull/4595
```

Both, issue and PR are still 'open' after ~1 year.

I am not saying that another build system doesn't make sense. But ipcalc seems to be a trivial project compared to gnutls and doesn't need gnulib.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitLab: https://gitlab.com/gnutls/gnutls/issues/320#note_265844215
You're receiving this email because of your account on gitlab.com.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnutls-devel/attachments/20191230/a0d92719/attachment.html>