This sounds good to me. Thanks for running the test, I got swamped with
other stuff and could not get to it.
I think the reason it does not fail is that the output of
wayland-scanner is in the git repository and therefore it does not need
to be run the first time. I suppose it would fail if somebody altered
the xml file before the first build, but I'm not sure if that is a big
problem.
On 02/23/2015 05:53 PM, Bryce Harrington wrote:
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 11:11:36PM +0000, Emil Velikov wrote:
On 23 February 2015 at 22:32, Bill Spitzak <[email protected]> wrote:
wayland-scanner is built as part of "make" in wayland. However it is also
used to convert the xml descriptions to .c and .h files, which are also used
by "make".
In some early versions of Wayland this would never work for a new user. It
would not find wayland-scanner and fail, so "make install" never worked and
you could not get things working without doing a manual step of copying the
wayland-scanner executable to the path.
A big annoyance is that once you get wayland to install, this never happens
again, leading the developers to not notice if it breaks.
A related annoyance is that editing the source for wayland scanner should
cause the .h/.C files to be regenerated using the new version and used to
compile the rest of wayland and weston. This can make it easy to not realize
a bug was introduced into wayland scanner.
So to sum it all up (see if I got it correct):
- Wayland (as opposed to weston) issue
- During a wayland build, there is a dependency of wayland-scanner.
- One can manually work around the problem by copying wayland-scanner.
- The dependencies are still not honoured and wayland-scanner never
gets rebuild and/or reused(reinstalled).
I would assume that removing wayland{,-scanner} and tracking down the
dependency sounds like a bit of a pain :-)
Shouldn't it be sufficient to just move wayland-scanner out of your path?
I deleted or moved aside all wayland-scanner binaries, so 'which
wayland-scanner' returned nothing. Then 'make distclean' in my wayland
tree. This should replicate Bill's wayland newbie's environment.
Now:
$ ./autogen.sh --prefix=$WLD 2>&1 | grep scanner
config.status: creating src/wayland-scanner-uninstalled.pc
config.status: creating src/wayland-scanner.pc
$ cat src/wayland-scanner-uninstalled.pc
pkgdatadir=/home/bryce/build/Wayland/wayland
wayland_scanner=/home/bryce/build/Wayland/wayland/src/wayland-scanner
Name: Wayland Scanner
Description: Wayland scanner (not installed)
Version: 1.7.90
$ cat src/wayland-scanner.pc
prefix=/home/bryce/build/Wayland/install
exec_prefix=${prefix}
datarootdir=${prefix}/share
pkgdatadir=${datarootdir}/wayland
wayland_scanner=${exec_prefix}/bin/wayland-scanner
Name: Wayland Scanner
Description: Wayland scanner
Version: 1.7.90
$ which wayland-scanner
$ ls /usr/local/bin/*scanner*
$ make 2>&1 | grep wayland-scanner
CCLD wayland-scanner
$ make install 2>&1 | grep scanner
/bin/bash ./libtool --mode=install /usr/bin/install -c wayland-scanner
'/home/bryce/build/Wayland/install/bin'
libtool: install: /usr/bin/install -c wayland-scanner
/home/bryce/build/Wayland/install/bin/wayland-scanner
/usr/bin/install -c -m 644 wayland-scanner.m4
'/home/bryce/build/Wayland/install/share/aclocal'
/usr/bin/install -c -m 644 wayland-scanner.mk protocol/wayland.xml
protocol/wayland.dtd '/home/bryce/build/Wayland/install/share/wayland'
/usr/bin/install -c -m 644 src/wayland-client.pc src/wayland-server.pc
src/wayland-scanner.pc cursor/wayland-cursor.pc
'/home/bryce/build/Wayland/install/lib/pkgconfig'
So... Everything appears to be hanging together just fine. I'm
gathering that when wayland-scanner isn't found on the path it's using
the locally built binary instead?
My proposed test, with a --prefix to an install directory:
1. clear out the install directory
2. make sure "wayland-scanner" does not exist on the machine
3. go into wayland and type "make install"
Another test I would like to do is:
1. Edit wayland-scanner to put an obvious typo into the .h file
2. Run "make" and insure that it fails.
Sounds like you might want to have a OBS(-like) [1] solution which
does a clean [2] build of wayland.
As it happens, I set such a thing up a few months back via Launchpad[3],
to create a daily-builds PPA for ubuntu[4]. During this time it's been
building successfully.
No disrespect but isn't all this somewhat orthogonal to what I'm
proposing/fixing, or did it just remind you of the problem ?
It's maybe a bit orthogonal but better to ask too many questions than
not enough. Plus I wondered the same as Bill about it.
Thanks for the comprehensive explanation Bill :-)
Emil
Bryce
[1] http://openbuildservice.org/
[2] Create a VM/container with the bare dependencies, with which one
builds the package.
[3] https://code.launchpad.net/~wayland.admin/+recipe/wayland-daily
[4] https://launchpad.net/~wayland.admin/+archive/ubuntu/daily-builds
_______________________________________________
wayland-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
