Removal of zlib, take 2.

Jelmer Vernooij jelmer at
Wed Jul 16 18:47:55 MDT 2014

On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 05:29:43PM -0700, Jeremy Allison wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 12:21:26PM +1200, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> > 
> > Yes.
> > 
> > We should also, for this and for the script,
> > validate the md5sum.  (Simo asked me to do that ages ago, and I've not
> > got to it yet). 
> > 
> > While I don't want to discourage you, Ira's lib_3p branch, taken only to
> > the point of moving the code, but then additionally blacklisting it from
> > the tarball, seems less work in the short term, if we are OK with this
> > code being in git. 
> Personally I'd rather do the build farm work and remove
> the code from git, but that's just my preference. I think
> it will be much cleaner in the long run and ensure we
> build ourselves like everyone else does. Less room for
> errors IMHO.
> Let's see what others think.
Removing the code from git seems "cleaner" to me, too - though keeping
code in a lib_3p directory is fine as a transitionary state.

If we eventually remove the bundled libraries from git then
we should keep the code for downloading these tarballs in the Samba
tree, rather than in the buildfarm tree, so that it is easy to
reproduce errors that happen on the build farm using bundled



Jelmer Vernooij <jelmer at> -
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <>

More information about the samba-technical mailing list