Re: What is the build strategy between make and meson?

Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com> writes:
> It is my first time trying meson build, and I got a bunch of warnings on my MacBook with macOS Sequoia 15.6.1:
> ...
> ../src/interfaces/libpq/fe-connect.c:5622:12: warning: 'ldap_init' is deprecated: first deprecated in macOS 10.10 -
useldap_initialize [-Wdeprecated-declarations] 

You would get those same warnings with configure/make too, if you
specified --with-ldap.  The relevant difference here is that configure
will not try to build with LDAP unless you tell it --with-ldap,
whereas meson's default behavior is to try to build with every option
that it can find supporting headers/libraries for.  That's a
philosophical difference between the build systems that we can't
really paper over.

> The other problem I encountered is that, when unicode map files are regenerated, “make” won’t auto rebuild
corresponding.o and lib files, but ninja does. That means “Makefile” has something to fix. But given ninja works,
should“Makefile” still be fixed? 

Probably.

> So, I want to clarify that:
> * Is it free for developers to choose make or meson?
> * If something works with one but the other, should that be fixed?

I believe the long-term plan is to abandon autoconf/make in favor of
meson, but the emphasis is on "long" --- any such decision is still
years away, I think.  In the meantime it's probably still worth
repairing deficiencies in the makefiles.  It's definitely worth
repairing deficiencies in the meson files, of which there are plenty.

            regards, tom lane