Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/6] meson build improvements

[Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>]

On Tue, 2020-01-14 at 16:19 +0000, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 05:00:17PM +0100, David Marchand wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 10:52 PM Bruce Richardson
> > <
> > bruce.richardson@intel.com
> > > wrote:
> > > These patches make some improvements to the meson build,
> > > particularly
> > > for documentation. They also remove many, but not all warnings
> > > issued
> > > by meson e.g. warnings about newer features unsupported in
> > > baseline.
> > > 
> > > The biggest change is to improve the handling of the guide html
> > > docs.
> > > The change here is more significant, and the doc build now uses a
> > > wrapper script around sphinx. This wrapper script allows us to
> > > output
> > > correct dependency information for the sphinx build in a .d file.
> > > This
> > > .d file is processed by ninja (not meson) on build, so that any
> > > changes
> > > to doc files trigger a rebuild to the guides using sphinx.
> > > 
> > > For now, the two patches which remove the meson version warnings
> > > are
> > > CC'ed to stable for backport, theoretically this who set could be
> > > backported if so desired, as all changes could be considered
> > > fixes to
> > > some degree or other, and nothing introduces a whole new feature.
> > > 
> > > Note: for completeness and simplicity, previously submitted patch
> > > http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/64189/
> > >  is included in this set, and will
> > > be marked superceded in patchwork.
> > > 
> > > V4: fix build with older sphinx
> > > 
> > > V3: Shorten the python code in patch 5, and ensure style
> > > compliance as
> > > flagged by Aaron.
> > > 
> > > V2: resend to correct email addresses
> > 
> > Tried this series in Travis.  It went fine through my own checks
> > too.
> > 
> > But OBS is not happy with Debian 10, Debian Next and Ubuntu >=
> > 18.04.
> > The packaging fails when ninja can't find the 'doc' target.
> > 
> 
> Can you send on a link to the failure logs?
> 
> I suspect this may be due to returning early from the doc folder if
> the
> document building is disabled (but need to see logs to confirm).
> However,
> I'm not sure it makes sense to have a doc target defined if doc
> building is
> disabled in build config.

Sorry, should have thought about this when reviewing: the usefulness of
having the target work without the option set is that the docs will
only be built when called explicitly, without having to change the
configuration.

Given the doc build is very slow and it's arch-independent, in
Debian/Ubuntu we only do it once, in the arch-independent target (arch:
all).

-- 
Kind regards,
Luca Boccassi