2006/1/25, Bas Driessen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Wed, 2006-01-25 at 09:11 +0100, Vivien Malerba wrote: > 2006/1/25, Bas Driessen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 09:18 +0100, Vivien Malerba wrote: > > 2006/1/24, Bas Driessen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Hello All, > > > > > > Just downloaded the latest CVS libgda sources and while attempting to > > > compile I noticed 2 issues: > > > > > > -1 undefined reference to `g_access' > > > -2 undefined reference to `g_mkdir_with_parents' > > > > > > Apparently 'g_access' and 'g_mkdir_with_parents' are only available in > > glib > > > 2.8, while the system I am working on (FC4) has glib 2.6.6 installed. If > > we > > > really want to use these 2 new calls, configure.in has to be modified to > > > check for glib version >= 2.8 rather than 2.0.0 as it is doing now. > > > > > > On the other hand, these new calls are only made in 3 files > > > (gda-diagnose.c, gda-test-models.c and gda-test-sql.c) in the /testing > > > directory. do we really want to up the glib requirement just for these 3 > > > testing files? An easy workaround for glib 2.6 is to replace g_access > with > > > access and g_mkdir_with_parents with g_mkdir. Not sure if that is > > compatible > > > with 2.8, but we could use #ifdef settings based on the glib version in > > case > > > it is not. > > > > > > Personally I would like to keep libgda compatible with glib 2.6. > > > > > > > I agree with you. Can you provide a patch? > > > > > > Changes applied to cvs HEAD as discussed. There are many glib 2.6 specific > > function calls in the functions in the /testing directory. Therefore I > have > > set the glib requirement in configure.in to a minimum of 2.6.0. This > should > > be a reasonable requirement for a modern library as libgda. The glib 2.6 > > library has been around for more than a year anyway. > > > > If anyone has a problem with this, please respond. > > I would have prefered that you use #ifdef to keep the > g_mkdir_with_parent() when possible as it does more than the > g_mkdir(): it creates the missing directories along the way. > > Anyway it's not a big deal, so don't bother correcting it. > > Thanks for the patch, > > Correct, that is why I suggested the #ifdef situation. After reading up on > the web on both g_mkdir and g_mkdir_parent they both appear to translate to > the "mkdir -p" situation. I could not see any difference other than a better > (?) name. I will double check in the morning and download and look in the > actual code and find the differences if any. > > Probably not a big deal, like you said, but if we make a change, let's do > it the proper way :)
Right, thanks, Vivien _______________________________________________ gnome-db-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-db-list
