Re: Autotools and The Core

On Monday 22 March 2004 02:56, Rodney Dawes wrote:
> Well. I can't seem to grab only "core" for example. I tried to grab
> just eb-lite/core, and svn grabbed all the modules, and just put
> everything under "eb-lite/core/" on my local system.
Ah, you're changing the wrong argument: :^)
The subversion checkout command goes:

svn co <location> <destination dir>

So, to check out just the core from trunk into a directory called 
mydir/, you can do:
svn co http://subv.everybuddy.com:888/svn/trunk/core mydir

> > > I do have it passing distcheck now, but there
> > > are still quite a bit of issues to deal with, mainly the static
> > > vs. dynamic plug-in builds.
> >
> > Yeah, minefield, that. I always build static, myself (less likely
> > to blow up in one's face, in my experience) - perhaps this should
> > be the default? Loadable modules are always good (I know Edward in
> > particular wants this), and we shouldn't turn them off, but to be
> > quite honest, can you imagine yourself wanting to upgrade, say,
> > just the MSN module?
>
> So I saw when I discovered the .mer config system. :)
Yeah. That's pretty vestigial nowadays, I just haven't got around to 
removing it.

> I'd actually 
> prefer to keep the dynamic modules as the default. I've never had
> problems dynamic modules blowing up in my face, where the issue was
> that of the underlying loading system. It has always been better for
> me. And yes, I could imagine myself wanting to upgrade only the MSN 
> module. Though, it doesn't really matter if the module is part of the
> core package. There are so many advantages to having loadable modules
> for this sort of thing, that I'd rather not waste time arguing it,
> and just fix the build system to work properly. :)
Conceded. I don't get much benefit from them, but hey, other people do, 
and - bonus! - someone else is doing the work, so I am by no means 
about to complain :^)

> > That's Edward's patch, and I'm afraid I haven't a clue. A while
> > ago, I essentially made the decision that any part of the core
> > within MINGW #ifdefs was Edward's jurisdiction, and that he was as
> > free to commit to them as, say, Karine is to ebnc, so I haven't
> > even reviewed most of these changes.
>
> Hrmm. OK. AFAICT, most of this shouldn't be here.
OK. I'll see if I can get Edward to review your diffs, though.

> > Damn right, I really quite dislike glib :-P
> > The core should depend on as little as possible.
>
> What is your dislike with glib?
Uhm, a good few things. It's a big library for little things, it's an 
unnecessary dependency (and a definite pain in the ass when building in 
places other than straight up Linux), and dammit, it's not ANSI :-P


> I could see the core source being 
> reduced heftily by using it. :)
Where so, exactly? Apart from the list routines and polling loop, that 
is?

> PAM even requires glib these days. 
One more reason to use Slackware? (Joke!)

Meredydd