[webkit-dev] [webkit meeting notes] build systems

[Adam Treat]

I am very skeptical that it is feasible to write a gyp generator that would 
output QMake files.  There is a log of magic in those QMake files.  My sense is 
that it would not be trivial by any means.

Plus, I don't like the idea of a meta-meta generators.  Seems way to mickey-
mouse to me.

Adam

On Friday 16 April 2010 12:42:01 am Peter Kasting wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 9:15 PM, Kevin Ollivier 
<kevino at theolliviers.com>wrote:
> > Anyway, my $0.02 is that, in terms of immediate bang for the buck, we're
> > probably better off trying to synchronize the build systems automatically
> > in some way. My perception is that Qt developers will want to use qmake,
> > GTK will want to use autotools, etc. and while some build systems could
> > certainly be merged (e.g. as you say the Win and Mac projects for WebKit
> > itself could be gyp-generated), I don't think we'll ever really narrow
> > it down to one master system for a variety of reasons. I do, however,
> > think we may be able to narrow the 'build system updating' process down
> > to one step / one script that updates all ports simultaneously, and do
> > so without too much effort.
> 
> If I'm not mistaking you, that seems to be the route Evan is discussing,
> with his concrete proposal being to investigate the feasibility of making
> gyp be the mechanism by which various different build systems can be
> generated from a single place (rather than seven).  Or is this not what you
> were saying?
> 
> Since most build systems out there have their data stored in either XML or
> 
> > plain text, converting a build file list from one build system's data
> > format to another is probably not more than a few hours of Python
> > hacking, if that.
> 
> Indeed, we already have MSVC/XCode/makefile generators for gyp, I would
> assume that given those, a generator for e.g. qmake wouldn't be hard.
> 
> I really think someone should seriously consider investing some time and
> 
> > resources into improving this issue though, updating a build system
> > doesn't take long but updating 7-10 build systems on almost a daily
> > basis probably adds up to some pretty significant amount of time and
> > energy that could probably be spent on better things.
> 
> I think that is the shared viewpoint that has led to this discussion.
> 
> PK