On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 03:30:24PM +0200, Branko Čibej wrote: > On 16.04.2018 14:29, James McCoy wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 10:42:31AM +0200, Branko Čibej wrote: > >> [Moved from users@] > >> > >> On 16.04.2018 10:36, Branko Čibej wrote: > >>> The problem is that Swig has become a build-time dependency now. We > >>> don't configure the Swig bindings unless Swig is installed, even if the > >>> binding sources are already generated — as they are in the release > >>> tarballs. > >>> > >>> The solution is to install Swig and tell configure about it: > >>> > >>> $ sudo pkg install swig30 > >>> $ ./configure --with-swig=/usr/local/bin/swig30 ... > >>> > >>> > >>> This will not cause the Swig sources to be regenerated, but will perform > >>> the proper configuration to make them compile correctly. > >>> > >>> I consider this to be a bug in our build scripts, FWIW. > >> I tracked this down to r1751167, which is only on trunk and 1.10.x. > >> > >> Long story short: it is wrong to require swig in order to configure the > >> swig bindings. The whole point of putting generated swig wrappers into > >> the release tarballs is so that users can build them without having to > >> install swig. > >> > >> Defining the symbols SWIG_PY_COMPILE, SWIG_RB_COMPILE, and so on, should > >> depend on the various scripting languages being installed, not on the > >> presence of Swig. > >> > >> Can anyone explain the reasoning behind this change? > > I did some searching to see if I could find any discussion that led me > > to making this change and didn't turn up anything. I assume I was > > missing the context of the Swig bindings being pre-generated. > > > > Maybe we should have some automated testing for the peculiarities of > > release tarballs to avoid mistakes like this in the future? > > We do, it's called release testing,
That's not automated. :) Especially since this is a known peculiarity, it might be useful to have one bot generate a release tree (assuming our tooling for that is independent from tagging), uninstall swig, and then build. > > Reverted in r1829260. > > Ok ... please make a backport proposal for 1.10.x. Done. Cheers, -- James GPG Key: 4096R/91BF BF4D 6956 BD5D F7B7 2D23 DFE6 91AE 331B A3DB
