[PATCHv2 1-14/14] Re: Disabling Python Modules

Andrew Bartlett abartlet at samba.org
Mon Mar 6 09:47:10 UTC 2017


On Tue, 2017-02-28 at 09:49 -0500, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> On 23/02/17 10:44 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> > On 21/02/17 05:13 PM, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2017-02-21 at 00:01 -0500, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > So since python isn't actually required, something along the
> > > > lines of
> > > > this should also suffice? (note, haven't tested yet)
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/ctdb/wscript b/ctdb/wscript
> > > > index 13384c8..5aac7eb 100644
> > > > --- a/ctdb/wscript
> > > > +++ b/ctdb/wscript
> > > > @@ -107,8 +107,8 @@ def configure(conf):
> > > >      if conf.env.standalone_ctdb:
> > > >          conf.SAMBA_CHECK_PERL(mandatory=True)
> > > > 
> > > > -        conf.SAMBA_CHECK_PYTHON(mandatory=True,
> > > > version=(2,5,0))
> > > > -        conf.SAMBA_CHECK_PYTHON_HEADERS(mandatory=True)
> > > > +        conf.SAMBA_CHECK_PYTHON(mandatory=False,
> > > > version=(2,5,0))
> > > > +        conf.SAMBA_CHECK_PYTHON_HEADERS(mandatory=False)
> > > > 
> > > >      if conf.CHECK_FOR_THIRD_PARTY():
> > > >          conf.RECURSE('third_party/popt')
> > > 
> > > Can you have a practical play and ensure we not only build ctdb,
> > > but it
> > > doesn't have any of the bundled libs producing python bindings?
> > > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > 
> > > Andrew Bartlett
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > I've updated the PR with this solution (and fixed a conflict
> > against
> > some recent talloc/wscript changes), and am testing ctdb standalone
> > builds locally now. A 'find' run within the installation prefix
> > location during the autobuild test finds no python bindings (or
> > anything else python-related) at all, so I would count this fix as
> > successful.
> > 
> 
> Hey all -- Travis is green on this and as far as i've seen there
> haven't been any additional issues reported; is there anything left
> to
> do in preparation for pushing?  Should I git-format-patch and attach
> here again for final review or is the github PR sufficient?

A git-format-patch always gets more attention.  

If you could rebase on my py3 branch (or provide a set each way), that
would help, because absent any more issues I want to merge that first,
as it is the more complex.

I thank you for your incredible patience in this matter.

Andrew Bartlett

-- 
Andrew Bartlett                       http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team  http://samba.org
Samba Developer, Catalyst IT          http://catalyst.net.nz/services/samba




More information about the samba-technical mailing list