[PATCH] pidl/Python: don't assume presence of client header

David Disseldorp ddiss at suse.de
Thu Mar 12 05:46:26 MDT 2015

On Thu, 12 Mar 2015 12:28:05 +0100, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:

> > Which users? I haven't been able to find such (IMO broken) use cases in
> > Samba, but may be looking in the wrong place.  
> I think it is quite surprising behaviour - especially as you won't be
> able to build the resulting C file.
> > 
> > Given that the initial regression was introduced to fix warnings in the
> > generated code, I'm not so sure it'd cause breakage.  
> What is the use case you're trying to address?

The use case is generating Python marshaling and unmarshalling functions
only, i.e. calling pidl --python without --client. ATM we unnecessarily
generate, build and link a heap of idl code that is unused.

> The correct fix is to only include the header file if there were
> any calls generated that use the client code. You could do this by
> checking for the number of functions in the interfaces beforehand.

Okay, I'll put this patch on hold for the moment. I obviously need to
learn more about pidl internals and use cases before proceeding with a
proper fix.

Cheers, David

More information about the samba-technical mailing list