getpass regressions on Solaris/Illumos - 3.6 and master.

Jeremy Allison jra at
Mon Jan 30 18:09:47 MST 2012

On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:27:39AM -0500, Ira Cooper wrote:
> In looking at this issue in more detail:
> I've heard the argument: Putting all the header files in replace.h will
> increase build time.  So I did the experiment.  I put all the system/*
> include files in replace.h except for system/kerberos.h, because
> system/kerberos.h broke my build.  So far the difference doesn't look very
> big at all, at least on my machine!  Now, I'll admit my development machine
> is a really bad place to benchmark builds, so I'd like others to chime in
> with their results, if there is interest in this approach.  This patch is
> include_it_all.patch.
> (make -j64 of our autoconfed build; on my dev box.)
> Without the extra headers:
> real    0m47.438s
> user    8m38.416s
> sys     1m17.440s
> With them:
> real    0m49.108s
> user    8m55.999s
> sys     1m23.193s
> There is a second viable approach that metze pointed at, but this is NOT
> what he suggested directly.  Pull the getpass section of system/passwd.h
> into replace.h  Including the definition of rep_getpass.  If you do it
> without that definition, you'll break platforms without a good getpass and
> getpassphrase.  :(  This patch is add_getpass.patch.
> Diffs for both approaches are included.
> The add_getpass.patch is what I consider the "absolute minimum" to close
> this issue.  But I thought the first approach was interesting enough, and
> the result interesting enough that I've included both.  I'd like to see
> other developer's times on the "include_it_all.patch".  Please be careful
> of caching effects.  Build both ways a few times.

Ok, I like the add_getpass.patch as it seems smaller and cleaner to

Metze, or anyone else with an interest can you please comment on
this asap ?

Otherwise I think I'll just add add_getpass.patch into master and
drive it through the process.



More information about the samba-technical mailing list