I'll limit my responses to questions about sconsUtils, as that's the
only area where I'm really an expert here.

On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 5:02 AM, Fabrice Jammes <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> - Do you think Qserv build should relies on sconsutils ?

I don't think this is as important as relying on EUPS; I personally
think Qserv should use sconsUtils only if it is convenient to do so.
It basically provides a configuration system and convenience functions
that allow SCons scripts to be much more concise if the package is
laid out in a certain way and you're willing to commit to creating
.cfg files that describe all of your dependencies.  In particular, it
will be most helpful if:
 - You have a lot of compiled code; a lot of what sconsUtils provides
is configuration of various compiler build variables (include
directories, library directories, etc).
 - You organize the package in the same way as most DM packages, with
doc, include, lib, python, src, and ups directories.
 - You use Swig to build Python wrappers for C++ code and need to
build against Swig modules created by dependencies.

> - Do you thinks sconsutils may be compatible with rpm format ?

Most of it is, and possibly all of it.  The part I'd be concerned with
is the need for .cfg files not just for your own package but for all
your dependencies as well.  So if your dependencies come from other
rpms, you'd need .cfg files for those too.  But they wouldn't need to
be installed with those dependencies; you could package them directly
with Qserv too.  Other than that, using sconsUtils with rpm shouldn't
be any different from any other SCons-based build system.

Jim

########################################################################
Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list

To unsubscribe from the QSERV-L list, click the following link:
https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=QSERV-L&A=1