On 02/27/17 12:22, Magnus Fromreide wrote: > On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 02:46:30PM -0500, Bill Fenner wrote: >> snmp_enum.c has been (very reasonably) changed to >> use register_const_config_handler(). This confounds --with-minimalist, >> though, because snmp_enum.c doesn't require the feature. >> >> I see two ways forward here: >> 1. Make register_const_config_handler unconditional. It's used by >> snmp_enum.c and snmp_enum.c is unconditional. It's also probably a couple >> of bytes of actual code given that it's just a wrapper with a cast, so >> keeping it optional is not a huge win. >> 2. Make snmp_enum.c require register_const_config_handler. This is not a >> big deal, but it requires moving snmp_enum.c earlier in the list of files >> to get the dependency right. >> >> I don't have a strong opinion here. Does anyone else? > > I think we could go with option #1 and unfeaturize it. > > I also think it is bad that the minimalist dependency handling depends on > the build order so that one can't have something in the agent depend on > something in the library, but fixing that feels like a big job, especially > since the cmake stuff is coming.
Is anyone currently working on migrating the configure scripts to cmake? Anyway, if we switch to cmake I think we should also consider to use ninja. E.g. the rdma-core project uses cmake + ninja and builds faster than any other open source project I'm familiar with. See also https://github.com/linux-rdma/rdma-core. Bart. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list Net-snmp-coders@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
