GSoC -- Possible projects

[David Disseldorp]

On Mon, 6 May 2013 17:20:09 +0200
Aurélien Aptel <aurelien.aptel at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 12:20 PM, David Disseldorp <ddiss at suse.de> wrote:
> > Some further explanation of build-system changes would be good to see.
> > Namely, do you plan to make libarchive a hard dependency for smbclient,
> > or could you have smbclient archive support conditional, based on
> > whether the libarchive development headers are present at build time.
> 
> What is preferable? I personally think adding libarchive as a hard
> dependency is simpler: I'm planning on rewriting the module not
> providing an optional replacement.

My preference would be to have the libarchive dependency optional, such
that smbclient does not advertise or accept archival arguments when
built without libarchive.
This could of course be left until later, starting simple would be a
good idea :).

Cheers, David