Quoting r. Hal Rosenstock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] userspace/management now partially uses autotools > > On Sun, 2005-01-30 at 06:06, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > For now, we have a huge step backwards. > > I don't agree with your qualification of this as huge. > > > I quote the README file: > > > > > To make this tree, > > > 1. In libibcommon, libibumad, and libibmad (in that order), run: > > > ./autogen.sh && ./configure && make && make install > > > 2. In all util and diag subdirectories, run: > > > ./autogen.sh && ./configure > > > 3. At top level of management, run: > > > make && make install > > > > > > Hal, currently this means that > > 1. its painful to build opensm > > Several manual steps are required. > > This is only temporary.
I understand, but could not the check-in wait till its working? > > 2. The process differs from the standard configure/make > > How ? need auto-tools. > > I think generated configure files shall be checked in so that > > the process is less painful for most people. > > I did the same thing as was done in the other userspace directories. Sure, but so far opensm is the only tool I know that depends on such a lot of libraries, so its lett painful there. > > 3. Current build requires that libraries are *installed* > > before opensm is built. > > This means that I cant have two versions installed without > > manual tweaks, and that just to *check* if some problem I have is fixed > > on > > trunk, I must install newer libraries possibly breaking a > > perfectly good installation. > > The newer libraries are only required if there are changes in them. Like, libumad? :) > This is the way the other userspace libraries are done. There are tools (vim) that have a configure flag to tell them which library version to use:local or system-wide. Others (like gcc) will check whether they reside in the same tree with the libraries, and if so link against them. Subversion code I think defaults to in-tree libraries if found, and supplies a flag to override it. > If it is consensus to remove the installation dependency, this is > straightforward to do. I think at least an option would be nice. > > May I suggest such changes shall be checked in > > when they are fully ready (when all the tree has been converted) > > and not half ready? > > Alternatively, put them on a branch. > > I'll convert it back if that's what people want. It's pretty simple to > do. You can do this in your own tree if you don't like the way it is. > > -- Hal > Dont get me wrong, I'm not against configure/make as a method, I think generally its good to standardize the build and you are going in the right direction with this with using standard configure/make commands. Cheers. -- MST - Michael S. Tsirkin _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [email protected] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
