On Wed, 2006-09-06 at 19:58 +0400, unDEFER wrote:
> В письме от Wed, 06 Sep 2006 17:59:21 +0400, Dave Kleikamp
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> сообщал:
>
> > The only library in jfsutils is statically linked to the utilities.
> > There is no general-purpose library.
>
> But e.g. e2fsprogs and xfsprogs installs it's libraries and headers. And I
> don't think that libxfs.a and libext2fs.a maybe called general-purpose
> library :-)
I see that these packages do install the libraries and headers. I'm
really not comfortable bloating jfsutils with what I consider ugly files
that would be of no use to most users. This code was not written as a
well-structured library, but is an ad-hoc collection of code thrown
together by separate developers, each working on different utilities.
> >> So I can copy the code of this to my package, but it is not good.
> >
> > The on-disk format is unlikely to change, so using a copy of the code is
> > probably okay (jfsutils and anyfs-tools are both GPL). It's not the
> > cleanest solution though.
>
> So, I here to be clean :-)
Agreed.
> > Is this just a packaging request? That is, are the library and header
> > files useful as-is, or are there any particular functions that you need?
>
> Any particular functions I will include in my anyfs-tools package.
> It is not need to include any functions to jfs-utils, if it's don't use
> the function self.
I guess this means that you don't yet know exactly what in the library
is useful.
> Althogh I have dream to replace all mkfs utilities with it's build_fs
> analogs in all fsprogs packages. :-)
>
> > It would make sense for the library and headers to be a separate
> > package, probably jfsutils-devel.
>
> Yes, of course, any distribution package with library and headers will
> named jfsutils-devel.
> But `make` of jfsutils seems doesn't build any distribution package.
There is no make target, but the README has instructions to build an
rpm:
rpmbuild -tb jfsutils-1.1.*.tar.gz
("make dist" will build the tar.gz file if you get the source from cvs.)
I don't really know automake or rpm that well, so I don't touch the
makefiles more than I have to. I'm sure I can add something to create a
jfsutil-devel package.
> > I accept patches. :-)
>
> Confused..
> If you offer to write modification for jfstutils MakeFile.am's self?
I'll gladly accept patches to Makefile.am, or a new .spec.in file, or
whatever it takes. If not from you, maybe someone reading the mailing
list has the interest. If not, I'll try to find the time to do it.
I'll also accept cleanups to the library if it makes it easier to
support GPL projects such as your own.
> Thanks.
> Sorry for bad english.
No problem. I think I understand your English well enough.
--
David Kleikamp
IBM Linux Technology Center
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Jfs-discussion mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jfs-discussion
