[PATCH] Just another round of random cleanups

Martin Schwenke martin at meltin.net
Thu Sep 18 06:19:02 MDT 2014

On Thu, 18 Sep 2014 13:28:44 +0200, Volker Lendecke
<Volker.Lendecke at SerNet.DE> wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 07:51:13PM +1000, Martin Schwenke wrote:
> > I'm happy to do convert subsystems into private libraries... but I'd
> Not a good idea. Every library that we link in does have a
> cost in every process. I think for production use, i.e.
> without --developer) we need the libbigballofmud.so again.
> For developer, fine, every C file can get its own .so, but
> not for what we ship.

I'm not sure what you're suggesting.

1. Change the problem dependencies into private libraries by default so
   that autobuild passes.  Then have any packaging specs build-in those
   libraries and put up with the duplicate symbols across libraries.

   If the duplicate symbols are actually OK, then why don't we allow it
   in autobuild?  I guess they are not OK.

2. Revert back to coarse-grained libraries.

   It really does seem stupid to have to depend on samba-util when all
   you want is samba-debug.

   I actually have the same patch as you for tdb_wrap in one of my
   branches because I wanted to do the same dependency cleanup.

I guess that using a private library is how we get around everything
needing replace.

I would almost argue that samba-debug should be treated the same way
except that it does actually depend on a few things subsystems from
lib/util.  I guessing that if we make samba-debug a private library
then we end up with a similar problem for things like time-basic and
close-low-fd.  It's turtles all the way down...

peace & happiness,

More information about the samba-technical mailing list