third_party (ex-lib_3p) now ready for review.
ira at samba.org
Sat Jul 26 10:38:04 MDT 2014
On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 8:26 AM, Jelmer Vernooij <jelmer at samba.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 10:02:23AM -0700, Ira Cooper wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Jelmer Vernooij <jelmer at samba.org>
> > > On 23 July 2014 17:20:31 BST, Ira Cooper <ira at samba.org> wrote:
> > > >Checks for specific libraries don't belong under buildtools/wafsamba/,
> > > >> which is our set of support libraries on top of waf. Please add
> > > >> these checks in wscript or wscript_third_party or something
> > > >> like that.
> > >
> > > >I wasn't a fan of it either... but adding the changes to wscript is
> > > >just
> > > >ugly and stops us from reusing them properly.
> > > I doubt it would be that much code. Zlib is only used by samba itself.
> > > the others, we can just use pkg gonfig. Also, we'll have to do this
> > > eventually anyway when we split these libraries off from the main samba
> > > repo.
> > Any code duplication when it comes to maintaining that type of
> > is asking for trouble, IMHO. I'd like other people's feedback on this
> > issue before I make that type of change that I really tried to avoid.
> > Also pkg-config is not the only way to detect libraries. I want to
> > maintain the most compatibility we can with the current system, while
> > making this change.
> The only library for which this is relevant (because it's not just
> used by Samba, but by ldb and tdb too) is popt. The detection code for
> popt is a single line:
> conf.CHECK_BUNDLED_SYSTEM('popt', checkfunctions='poptGetContext',
What happens when we want to change the detection logic?
Well... I guess we'll have to hunt down everywhere... and fix it? No
thanks. That's why I wrote it the way I did. I assume it will change with
time as we do more with third_party.
More information about the samba-technical