[PATCH] Just another round of random cleanups
martin at meltin.net
Fri Sep 19 02:53:26 MDT 2014
On Thu, 18 Sep 2014 19:45:45 +0200, Volker Lendecke
<Volker.Lendecke at SerNet.DE> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 10:19:02PM +1000, Martin Schwenke wrote:
> > I'm not sure what you're suggesting.
> Here's a version that passed a private autobuild. Carries
> your R-B on the unchanged patches, the first two are
OK, it looks like Jeremy pushed these. Cool!
Having had 24 hours to think about this, I'm not convinced that having
a dependency on samba-debug is necessarily better than having a
dependency on samba-util. The dependency tells us what to link against,
and libsamba-util.so will already be loaded on the system. It also
says where to find includes.
Going finer grained depends on your motivations. My current motivation
is to be able to define a subset of samba-util to link against when
doing a standalone CTDB build. So, I'd prefer not to have to build
everything that samba-util currently depends on. I have a WIP patch in
my samba-build branch that pulls the subsystem that I need out of
samba-util (I'm currently calling it samba-util-core) and then only
builds samba-util (and a bunch of other things) if SAMBA_UTIL_CORE_ONLY
is *unset*. It seems backward compatible.
This works fine as long as nothing else I need depends on samba-util.
If something does, then I cheat by defining a samba-util subsystem in
ctdb/wscript that just depends on samba-util-core. This would only be
done for a standalone build. It would also be unnecessary if samba-util
A few patches coming soon...
peace & happiness,
More information about the samba-technical