Re: [PATCH] po/meson: make i18n module optional

[Philippe Mathieu-Daudé]

On 24/1/23 12:30, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 03:47:24AM +0000, Anton Kochkov wrote:
> > This is necessary for Muon build system compatibility and
> > prevents the following error:
>
> This raises the question of whether we actually want Muon compatibility
> in the first place though. IMHO one of the good benefits of Meson (and
> all other modern build systems), is that application maintainers no
> longer need to worry about portability between the many OS specific
> re-implementations of 'make'. Personally I feel pretty unethusiastic
> at the prospect of going back to that world by adding workarounds for
> incomplete re-implementations of meson.
>
> What is the compelling reason that users of QEMU need to use the
> imcomplete Muon re-implementation, instead of sticking with official
> Meson releases that QEMU maintainers actually test against on all
> our targetted OS platforms ?

Not really answered the point you raise, but a pair of commits seem
to prove Muon usefulness (by the QEMU maintainer who did the Meson
change!):

  commit eccae02d99dfcf32d5c5db76f59c8f6ba25b5cb0
  Author: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
  Date:   Thu Jul 14 10:43:46 2022 +0200

      meson: remove dead code

      Found with "muon analyze".

  commit e3af71e9009de156665df67b9bdf5bc192aae215
  Author: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
  Date:   Thu Jul 14 10:43:57 2022 +0200

      meson: remove dead assignments

      Found with "muon analyze".