From: Karel Zak <kzak@redhat.com>
To: dsterba@suse.cz, Anand Jain <Anand.Jain@oracle.com>,
linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2 v4] btrfs-progs: optimize btrfs_scan_lblkid() for multiple calls
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2014 10:33:27 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141128093327.GA1994@x2.net.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141114165127.GC8614@twin.jikos.cz>
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 05:51:27PM +0100, David Sterba wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 12:47:35PM +0100, Karel Zak wrote:
> > What I see critical is missing ./configure, because it's pretty ugly
> > to add hardcoded dependencies (e.g. libudev), there is also no checks
> > for another libs, Makefile does not care about place where libs are
> > installed, header files, etc. etc.
>
> It does, prefix and libdir are set conditionally, DESTDIR works.
>
> > Is there any fundamental problem with autoconf? If no, then I'm ready
> > to send patches with some autotools stuff. Comments?
>
> Yeah the build dependencies checks would be nice, there's no problem
> with autoconf.
OK, I'll try to prepare something next week.
> The Makefile has been manualy crafted and supports some macro magic to
> build several binaries from one rule, static targets, quiet/verbose
> build. I want to preserve all of this so transition to automake may take
> time (or may not happen in the end).
Just note, it's fine to expect (require) some build-system features,
but IMHO it's bad idea to think about build system as about stable
and always backwardly compatible interface (./configure options,
Makefile vars, etc).
For example for util-linux we have changed many many things in last
(~7) years without negative feedback from downstream maintainers or
users. IMHO more important is to follow usual conventions than assume
that my "make FOO=bar" will work forever.
Karel
--
Karel Zak <kzak@redhat.com>
http://karelzak.blogspot.com
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-11-28 9:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-10-15 0:51 [PATCH 1/2] btrfs-progs: introduce btrfs_register_all_device() Anand Jain
2014-10-15 0:51 ` [PATCH 2/2] btrfs-progs: optimize btrfs_scan_lblkid() for multiple calls Anand Jain
2014-10-23 6:30 ` [PATCH 2/2 v2] " Anand Jain
2014-10-30 14:18 ` David Sterba
2014-10-31 1:38 ` Anand Jain
2014-10-31 3:19 ` [PATCH 2/2 v3] " Anand Jain
2014-10-30 14:33 ` [PATCH 1/2] btrfs-progs: introduce btrfs_register_all_device() David Sterba
2014-10-31 2:28 ` Anand Jain
2014-10-31 4:11 ` [PATCH 1/2 v4] " Anand Jain
2014-10-31 4:11 ` [PATCH 2/2 v4] btrfs-progs: optimize btrfs_scan_lblkid() for multiple calls Anand Jain
2014-10-31 9:08 ` Karel Zak
2014-10-31 11:04 ` Anand Jain
2014-11-11 11:47 ` Karel Zak
2014-11-14 16:51 ` David Sterba
2014-11-28 9:33 ` Karel Zak [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20141128093327.GA1994@x2.net.home \
--to=kzak@redhat.com \
--cc=Anand.Jain@oracle.com \
--cc=dsterba@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).