> On April 10, 2014, 7:44 p.m., Benjamin Hindman wrote:
> > 3rdparty/Makefile.am, lines 73-75
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/20119/diff/3/?file=554542#file554542line73>
> >
> >     This could just be my ignorance of autotools, but does this mean if 
> > someone does a 'make dist' after first doing a ./configure 
> > --with-leveldb=/path/to/prefix then we won't include leveldb.tar.gz in the 
> > distribution? It seems like we'd always want leveldb in the distribution 
> > such that someone else could download that distribution and run configure 
> > differently and things just work.
> 
> Timothy St. Clair wrote:
>     That's *only-if* someone specifies --with-leveldb=/prefixloc, in that 
> case it's in the packagers court to decide.  Which is arguably the correct 
> path, should they choose to build that way.
> 
> Timothy St. Clair wrote:
>     So I sanity checked from multiple sources and all are in agreement.  If 
> the builder/packager chooses to build against a prefix'd package then it's 
> their responsibility to ensure the 'specific version' of their dependency is 
> available either through package management or otherwise.

This makes sense to me from a packagers perspective, especially since in 
creating the package you can likely use different mechanisms to specify your 
dependencies. But this doesn't make a lot of sense to me for somebody creating 
a distribution (e.g., for the 0.19.0 release). What's even more bizarre to me 
is that someone that downloads a distribution created this way and runs 
'./configure --enable-bundled' will not get an error but later when they run 
'make' compilation will fail when certain dependencies (headers, libraries, 
etc) are not found. So I guess my question is, what do we stand to gain by 
doing it this way? Maybe there is something I'm totally missing?


- Benjamin


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/20119/#review40069
-----------------------------------------------------------


On April 11, 2014, 4:29 p.m., Timothy St. Clair wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/20119/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated April 11, 2014, 4:29 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos and Benjamin Hindman.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-1071 and MESOS-1168
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1071
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1168
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos-git
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Allows preventing the use of bundled libraries in favor of preinstalled 
> versions, where possible.
> 
> --disable-bundled generally switches from bundled to preinstalled libraries.
> 
> If --disable-bundled is supplied or --with-leveldb[=DIR] was given but the 
> configuration phase could not locate the dependency, it stops with an error.
> If --disable-bundled is not supplied and no --with-leveldb[=DIR] was given, 
> the bundled library is built and used (DEFAULT). 
> 
> NOTE: 
> 1. This review only implements this preinstalled library usage on LevelDB & 
> ZooKeeper. Subsequent review requests for other bundled libraries will follow 
> as soon as this implementation has been accepted.
> 
> 2. This modification removed the old --without-installed-PACKAGE semantics, 
> as they conflict with well established --with-PACKAGE semantics
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   3rdparty/Makefile.am 23ff1fa 
>   configure.ac c1de6d7 
>   src/Makefile.am 95f133d 
>   src/python/setup.py.in 02f00ef 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/20119/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check across all combinatoric incantations. 
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Timothy St. Clair
> 
>

Reply via email to