Nicolas Williams wrote:
> - I excluded the SQLite 3.5.4 source and docs tar balls/zip archives
> from the webrev -- webrev doesn't know what to do with them.
no but it doesn't harm things to have them there, they just have to be
ignored :)
> - Yes, I'm putting this into $SRC/cmd, rather than $SRC/lib. I could
> put it in $SRC/lib. But frankly, I don't think cmd vs. lib makes
> sense for SFW.
I think it still does, just as in ON. It provides a higher level way of
separating the depencies just as it does in ON, which can simplify
things a bit. Though it's certainly ok to have exceptions (things
like bzip2/gcc which generate libraries in sfw's cmd, and ON which
has linker world in cmd/sgs :)
> SQLite3 includes a library (libsqlite3), Tcl bindings, and an
> executable (sqlite3), so does it belong in lib or cmd?
I think it depends on its primary purpose - are most things that
come in later and build on it primarily interested in the library
being there or the sqlite3 binary being there? I don't know,
though I'd probably guess the library. Of course that said, it's
really up to you as picking one or the other is not going to cause
an argument from me. Makefile dependencies can certainly be used to
set the proper build order up as well.
> - $SRC/cmd/sqlite3/install-sfw requires that elfedit(1) be present on
> the build system, which means that this will be a build flag day for
> the SFW consolidation.
I think you already need build 78 to build sfw because memcached or
something else needed libtool from there, and elfedit came in in 75,
unless you need some later fix to elfedit as well.
But I'm happy to see someone worrying about flag days :)
Mike
