On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 11:49:51AM -0800, Mike Sullivan wrote: > 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 :)
OK, I'll re-gen it. > > - 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 :) Hmmm, I don't quite buy it. SFW components are a lot more discrete than ON components. And many will install library and executable content both. (I'm not even sure that we could say that "Consolidation Private" means all that much within SFW because of this. There's no single cscope DB for all the code in the SFW consolidation either.) I think it'd be better to just have explicit dependencies called out, either in the form of actual makefile dependencies or in the ordering of appearance in SUBDIRS + .WAIT. Someday we may find a circular dependency between two FOSS components; that will be fun, I'm sure :) > > 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. SQLite3.x will primarily be used as a library, so I'll move it (besides, I don't expect SFW to drop the cmd vs. lib split). > > - $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. OK, good. > But I'm happy to see someone worrying about flag days :) Well, I've been burned by build flag days I've inadvertently caused in ON... :) I'm trying to learn! :) Nico --
