Does anyone use make_{asan,debug,impala,release}.sh?

[Tim Armstrong <ta...@cloudera.com>]

Currently one of the biggest pain points with the build system is the
number of layered shell scripts that interact with each other in
non-obvious ways.

The easiest way to simplify the situation, to start off with, is to delete
or deprecate some of them as entry points. I deleted some in
https://gerrit.cloudera.org/#/c/12271/ and it felt good.

The make_*.sh scripts are one candidate. I think the logic there should be
either moved to CMake (preferably) so we get proper dependency management
and a standard interface or become a function in buildall.sh. That way,
buildall.sh is the entry point if you want to do a full build or switch
build types and make/ninja is the entry point for incremental builds.
That's already my workflow and it works well.

Does anyone use those make_*.sh scripts directly as part of their workflow?
If so, which ones and how attached are you to them?

- Tim

Re: Does anyone use make_{asan,debug,impala,release}.sh?

[Tim Armstrong <ta...@cloudera.com>]

Here's a review for the easy part: https://gerrit.cloudera.org/#/c/12306/

I filed a different JIRA for the trickier part with a rough plan of attack:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IMPALA-8147

On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 5:36 AM Philip Zeyliger <ph...@cloudera.com> wrote:

> +1 to getting rid of them.
>
> On Sun, Jan 27, 2019 at 6:49 PM Quanlong Huang <hu...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > +1 for making the infra(bash/python scripts) simpler! It's hard for
> > beginners to make clear of their relationships and use them correctly.
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 9:45 AM Tim Armstrong <ta...@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Currently one of the biggest pain points with the build system is the
> > > number of layered shell scripts that interact with each other in
> > > non-obvious ways.
> > >
> > > The easiest way to simplify the situation, to start off with, is to
> > delete
> > > or deprecate some of them as entry points. I deleted some in
> > > https://gerrit.cloudera.org/#/c/12271/ and it felt good.
> > >
> > > The make_*.sh scripts are one candidate. I think the logic there should
> > be
> > > either moved to CMake (preferably) so we get proper dependency
> management
> > > and a standard interface or become a function in buildall.sh. That way,
> > > buildall.sh is the entry point if you want to do a full build or switch
> > > build types and make/ninja is the entry point for incremental builds.
> > > That's already my workflow and it works well.
> > >
> > > Does anyone use those make_*.sh scripts directly as part of their
> > workflow?
> > > If so, which ones and how attached are you to them?
> > >
> > > - Tim
> > >
> >
>

Re: Does anyone use make_{asan,debug,impala,release}.sh?

[Philip Zeyliger <ph...@cloudera.com>]

+1 to getting rid of them.

On Sun, Jan 27, 2019 at 6:49 PM Quanlong Huang <hu...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> +1 for making the infra(bash/python scripts) simpler! It's hard for
> beginners to make clear of their relationships and use them correctly.
>
> On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 9:45 AM Tim Armstrong <ta...@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Currently one of the biggest pain points with the build system is the
> > number of layered shell scripts that interact with each other in
> > non-obvious ways.
> >
> > The easiest way to simplify the situation, to start off with, is to
> delete
> > or deprecate some of them as entry points. I deleted some in
> > https://gerrit.cloudera.org/#/c/12271/ and it felt good.
> >
> > The make_*.sh scripts are one candidate. I think the logic there should
> be
> > either moved to CMake (preferably) so we get proper dependency management
> > and a standard interface or become a function in buildall.sh. That way,
> > buildall.sh is the entry point if you want to do a full build or switch
> > build types and make/ninja is the entry point for incremental builds.
> > That's already my workflow and it works well.
> >
> > Does anyone use those make_*.sh scripts directly as part of their
> workflow?
> > If so, which ones and how attached are you to them?
> >
> > - Tim
> >
>

Re: Does anyone use make_{asan,debug,impala,release}.sh?

[Quanlong Huang <hu...@gmail.com>]

+1 for making the infra(bash/python scripts) simpler! It's hard for
beginners to make clear of their relationships and use them correctly.

On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 9:45 AM Tim Armstrong <ta...@cloudera.com>
wrote:

> Currently one of the biggest pain points with the build system is the
> number of layered shell scripts that interact with each other in
> non-obvious ways.
>
> The easiest way to simplify the situation, to start off with, is to delete
> or deprecate some of them as entry points. I deleted some in
> https://gerrit.cloudera.org/#/c/12271/ and it felt good.
>
> The make_*.sh scripts are one candidate. I think the logic there should be
> either moved to CMake (preferably) so we get proper dependency management
> and a standard interface or become a function in buildall.sh. That way,
> buildall.sh is the entry point if you want to do a full build or switch
> build types and make/ninja is the entry point for incremental builds.
> That's already my workflow and it works well.
>
> Does anyone use those make_*.sh scripts directly as part of their workflow?
> If so, which ones and how attached are you to them?
>
> - Tim
>