The Wrapper Project

Jelmer Vernooij jelmer at
Thu Nov 28 17:38:23 MST 2013

On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 05:22:35PM +0100, Andreas Schneider wrote:
> On Thursday 28 November 2013 06:17:19 Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> > One of the oddities of Samba is that we don't do that very much at all.
> > We are very hesitant to rely on external free software projects, for
> > better or worse.
> So on day we will add glibc to our tree? :)
Obviously we don't want to do that, but we go through a lot of trouble
to work around defects in the system libc; libreplace is a testament
to that.

> >  I would want to ensure we had a very strict rule as to
> > exactly the version of these wrappers that we used against a specific
> > version of Samba.  I think bundling these like we do popt et al is the
> > best approach for now.
> Why are you (an others) always come up with these lame excuses. Why don't you 
> just admit that you are lazy and don't want to install any of the 3rdparty 
> software.
Thanks for keeping the discussion constructive.

I can't speak to Andrew's specific experiences here, but I've had
similar experiences in other projects. You're introducing more moving
parts. If I hit a strange bug running "make test", I don't want to
have to worry about whether I'm running the latest revision
of nss_wrapper, socket_wrapper, etc in which a relevant bug might
be fixed.

Having to install extra dependencies raises the bar for hacking on
Samba, and it makes things more complex for the buildfarm. That
cost can be justified in some cases, but adding three extra
dependencies to just avoid shipping ~10k LOC is not worth it.

> Last heimdal update: July 2011 (Heimdal last release was done 2012-01-11)
> Quick copy: 68 files changed, 6750 insertions(+), 3142 deletions(-)
> Last zlib update: before 2008 (moved to lib/ in 2008)
> Last iniparser update: before 2010 (moved to lib/ in 2010)
> Last popt update: before 2010 (moved to lib/ in 2010)

If we're going to start depending on external software and no longer
shipping a bundled copy, then let's start with more widely available and
mature libraries like zlib or popt.

I don't see why the update dates for these bundled libraries are
problematic here. At least these copies we can update if we want/need
to. If we start relying on the system copies then we'll encounter
users with much older versions.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <>

More information about the samba-technical mailing list