CTDB question: which repository is authoritative?

Martin Schwenke martin at meltin.net
Thu Jan 29 02:11:48 MST 2015

On Tue, 27 Jan 2015 19:07:58 +0000, David Hasson <dph at fb.com> wrote:

> Thanks Martin.  I've been working both of those routes.  The
> dependencies of the stock build out of the ctdb.git are really clean
> - and since I'm not using this with samba it has made sense to do
> that up until now.  My cherry picking attempts have been pretty
> amateur!  2.5.5 would be fantastic if possible.

Now I'm curious about your non-Samba use case!  Are you able to
share?  :-)

As for 2.5.5, we'll see how we go in the next week or so...

> For building out of samba.git - does using '--bundled-libraries=ALL'
> as an option to configure make sense for a standalone build?  Also,
> is the 'configure.rpm' script deprecated in favor of using 'make rpm'
> with the standard configure script?

Yes, --bundled-libraries=ALL would make sense.  By default, for the RPM
build, we expect to use the system tevent, talloc and tdb libraries.
However, if you don't have Samba installed then you mightn't have any
of those libraries installed either.  I've had some of the library
options behave strangely occasionally and all the combinations
certainly aren't tested... so let us know if anything weird happens.  I
just tested that particular option and it seems to work.  There's no
reason why it shouldn't work.

I think configure.rpm exists as a way for developers to build
replacement binaries that are compatible with those from an installed
RPM package.  I'm not sure we've ever used it for actually building
RPMs.  In ctdb.git we have packaging/RPM/makerpms.sh but for samba.git
we switched to "make rpm".

peace & happiness,

More information about the samba-technical mailing list