[mythtv] [mythtv-commits] Ticket #4397: win32 dependancy resolver and build script

Isaac Richards ijr at case.edu
Thu Apr 24 15:27:27 UTC 2008

On Thursday 24 April 2008 1:13:19 am buzz wrote:
> > This is _exactly_ why packaging stuff does not belong in SVN.  It's
> > always broken, and never useful.
> >
> > Isaac
> Sorry to dissagree with you Isaac (as it probably throws away any chance I
> might have for getting a SVN commit bit) ,  but isn't "never useful" a bit
> of an over statement?

I really don't care if people disagree with me. =)  The only thing I care 
about is code quality.  This script has a ways to go..

> Eg:    Without (for example) the win32-packager.pl each potential developer
> on the win32 platform would have to manually do the steps in the
> win32-packager script, by hand, and with much chance for error.   There are
> over 240 steps in the script so far.
> Would you have every Win32 developer do all this by hand every time, with
> the associated errors it would create?

The script appears to be seriously broken, in my opinion.  Why is it 
installing tools that the developer should (IMO, at least)?  Why is it 
compiling qt4 from scratch?  Why is it grabbing patches from *trac*?  

I think it would be quite productive to make some pre-compiled packages for 
the various dependencies, if none exist, rather than trying to compile them 

At the _very_ least, I'd think this should be split into a 'install 
dependencies', and 'build myth' scripts.  And, if the 'build myth' part is 
anything but 'configure, make, make install', then things need fixing in 
myth, not in a script.

> What we have now is a "tried and tested" methodology for getting each new
> developer(or installation anyway) somewhere between 99-100% of the way
> through these steps, without the otherwise guaranteed hair-pulling and
> failures that would otherwise result.    We also have a consistent
> approach, a documented method, and a shared knowledge that we would not
> otherwise have.      Ok, so we have failures. Who cares, if we have more
> successes that failures then it was valuable to those involved.
> How can you call that "never useful"?

If any given checkout of svn revision X requires a script that's in version 
X+Y to work, then how can it be useable?


More information about the mythtv-dev mailing list