Re: [PATCH] autoconf: don't build nfsdcltrack by default

[Steve Dickson <steved@redhat.com>]

Hey

On 12/7/23 3:14 PM, Jeff Layton wrote:
> On Thu, 2023-12-07 at 14:42 -0500, Steve Dickson wrote:
>> Hey Jeff!
>>
>> On 11/27/23 10:18 AM, Jeff Layton wrote:
>>> Now that we've started the process to remove legacy v4 client tracking
>>> methods, let's stop building nfsdcltrack by default.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
>>> ---
>>>    configure.ac | 4 ++--
>>>    1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
>>> index 93a1202807ea..62c833cc2409 100644
>>> --- a/configure.ac
>>> +++ b/configure.ac
>>> @@ -248,9 +248,9 @@ AC_ARG_ENABLE(nfsrahead,
>>>    	fi
>>>    
>>>    AC_ARG_ENABLE(nfsdcltrack,
>>> -	[AS_HELP_STRING([--disable-nfsdcltrack],[disable NFSv4 clientid tracking programs @<:@default=no@:>@])],
>>> +	[AS_HELP_STRING([--enable-nfsdcltrack],[enable NFSv4 clientid tracking programs @<:@default=no@:>@])],
>>>    	enable_nfsdcltrack=$enableval,
>>> -	enable_nfsdcltrack="yes")
>>> +	enable_nfsdcltrack="no")
>>>    
>>>    AC_ARG_ENABLE(nfsv4server,
>>>    	[AS_HELP_STRING([--enable-nfsv4server],[enable support for NFSv4 only server  @<:@default=no@:>@])],
>>>
>>> ---
>>> base-commit: cc5cccbb9f24a2324f50a5cb4c29d83fdf6b1f90
>>> change-id: 20231127-master-5ef1c15da9c4
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>> Quick Question... Should we remove the code or just
>> turn off the building as this patch does?
>>
>> steved.
>>
> 
> Eventually, I think we'll want to remove nfsdcltrack entirely, but I
> think we shouldn't do that right away, without announcing it first and
> giving distros some warning.
> 
> Since we're on the subject, how long should we wait before fully
> deprecating it? A year? 2 or 3 releases? What makes sense?
Well, I was planning on make a new release (nfs-utils-2-7-1) when
I took the patch... So I guess turning the build off for
now makes sense... just to see what happens.

> 
> Maybe we should have configure spew a warning about its impending
> removal when someone enables it too?
Hmm... If it is not needed... why go through the effort?
I've always been a fan of... a clean cut! :-)

steved.