the agent library is a shared library and it adds dependency towards stdc++, (if any standard library functions are used). We already have a dependency towards libc and if there should be any problems as you describe below, the agent shared library could be re-built towards the required stdc++.
/Thanks Hans On 02/10/2016 01:41 PM, Anders Widell wrote: > Does this add a dependency towards libstdc++ from the agent library? > If it does, I think it would be problematic. It could interfere with > an application which is also written in C++ but linked against a > difference C++ standard library (either a different version of > libstdc++, or a completely different implementation like e.g. libc++). > > / Anders Widell > > On 02/08/2016 04:37 PM, Hans Nordebäck wrote: >> Hi Praveen, Nagu, Mathi and Anders, >> >> Any comments on this patch? As Gary mentions below, it would e.g. >> make supporting long DN a lot easier. /Thanks HansN >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Gary Lee [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: den 1 februari 2016 09:49 >> To: Hans Nordebäck >> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; Anders Widell; >> Minh Chau H; [email protected]; >> [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for amfa: Divide amf api >> functions in a thin C layer and use C++ for implementation [#1673] >> >> Hi Hans >> >> I think it would be very, very nice if we got rid of SaNameT in >> libs/common/osaf, and replaced it with std::string. >> >> As you know, the data structures defined here are used by the agent, >> director and node director. >> >> There is a lot of code that copies and frees various messages (both >> in the common lib and director). It would make supporting long DN a >> lot easier, if we didn’t have to worry about SaNameT, and ‘deep >> copying’. >> >> Thanks >> Gary >> >>> On 30 Jan 2016, at 12:39 AM, Hans Nordeback >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Summary: amfa: Divide amf api functions in a thin C layer and use C++ >>> for implementation Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #1673 Peer >>> Reviewer(s): Mathi, AndersW, Praveen, Nagu, Gary, Minh Pull request >>> to: >>> Affected branch(es): default >>> Development branch: default >>> >>> -------------------------------- >>> Impacted area Impact y/n >>> -------------------------------- >>> Docs n >>> Build system n >>> RPM/packaging n >>> Configuration files n >>> Startup scripts n >>> SAF services n >>> OpenSAF services n >>> Core libraries y >>> Samples n >>> Tests n >>> Other n >>> >>> >>> Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above): >>> --------------------------------------------- >>> <<EXPLAIN/COMMENT THE PATCH SERIES HERE>> >>> >>> changeset 20dec14de18f2f5d4095c6d2ef703893e26723d7 >>> Author: Hans Nordeback <[email protected]> >>> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 14:35:14 +0100 >>> >>> amfa: Divide amf api functions in a thin C layer and use C++ for >>> implementation [#1673] >>> >>> The amf agent part is implemented in C and shares C data >>> structures with >>> amfd and amfnd, e.g. libs/common/osaf. It would be benficial if >>> the amf >>> agent could be split into two parts, one thin C layer that >>> passes the call >>> to C++ for the implementation. Then it will be significally >>> easier to >>> convert libs/common/osaf structures and functions to C++ and >>> remove e.g. the >>> use of SaNameT and support long DN. The C++ usage at the agent >>> could be >>> limited to follow C++98 standard to ease acceptance for >>> applications. A >>> patch is sent out with this change and comments are appreciated. >>> >>> >>> Added Files: >>> ------------ >>> osaf/libs/agents/saf/amfa/include/amf_agent.h >>> >>> >>> Complete diffstat: >>> ------------------ >>> osaf/libs/agents/saf/amfa/Makefile.am | 2 +- >>> osaf/libs/agents/saf/amfa/ava_api.c | 4207 >>> ++++++++++++++++--------------- >>> osaf/libs/agents/saf/amfa/ava_init.c | 2 +- >>> osaf/libs/agents/saf/amfa/include/amf_agent.h | 96 + >>> osaf/libs/agents/saf/amfa/include/ava.h | 7 + >>> osaf/libs/agents/saf/amfa/include/ava_cb.h | 7 + >>> osaf/libs/agents/saf/amfa/include/ava_dl_api.h | 7 + >>> osaf/libs/agents/saf/amfa/include/ava_hdl.h | 7 + >>> osaf/libs/agents/saf/amfa/include/ava_mds.h | 7 + >>> 9 files changed, 2304 insertions(+), 2038 deletions(-) >>> >>> >>> Testing Commands: >>> ----------------- >>> <<LIST THE COMMAND LINE TOOLS/STEPS TO TEST YOUR CHANGES>> >>> >>> >>> Testing, Expected Results: >>> -------------------------- >>> <<PASTE COMMAND OUTPUTS / TEST RESULTS>> >>> >>> >>> Conditions of Submission: >>> ------------------------- >>> <<HOW MANY DAYS BEFORE PUSHING, CONSENSUS ETC>> >>> >>> >>> Arch Built Started Linux distro >>> ------------------------------------------- >>> mips n n >>> mips64 n n >>> x86 n n >>> x86_64 y y >>> powerpc n n >>> powerpc64 n n >>> >>> >>> Reviewer Checklist: >>> ------------------- >>> [Submitters: make sure that your review doesn't trigger any >>> checkmarks!] >>> >>> >>> Your checkin has not passed review because (see checked entries): >>> >>> ___ Your RR template is generally incomplete; it has too many blank >>> entries >>> that need proper data filled in. >>> >>> ___ You have failed to nominate the proper persons for review and push. >>> >>> ___ Your patches do not have proper short+long header >>> >>> ___ You have grammar/spelling in your header that is unacceptable. >>> >>> ___ You have exceeded a sensible line length in your >>> headers/comments/text. >>> >>> ___ You have failed to put in a proper Trac Ticket # into your commits. >>> >>> ___ You have incorrectly put/left internal data in your comments/files >>> (i.e. internal bug tracking tool IDs, product names etc) >>> >>> ___ You have not given any evidence of testing beyond basic build >>> tests. >>> Demonstrate some level of runtime or other sanity testing. >>> >>> ___ You have ^M present in some of your files. These have to be >>> removed. >>> >>> ___ You have needlessly changed whitespace or added whitespace crimes >>> like trailing spaces, or spaces before tabs. >>> >>> ___ You have mixed real technical changes with whitespace and other >>> cosmetic code cleanup changes. These have to be separate commits. >>> >>> ___ You need to refactor your submission into logical chunks; there is >>> too much content into a single commit. >>> >>> ___ You have extraneous garbage in your review (merge commits etc) >>> >>> ___ You have giant attachments which should never have been sent; >>> Instead you should place your content in a public tree to be >>> pulled. >>> >>> ___ You have too many commits attached to an e-mail; resend as threaded >>> commits, or place in a public tree for a pull. >>> >>> ___ You have resent this content multiple times without a clear >>> indication >>> of what has changed between each re-send. >>> >>> ___ You have failed to adequately and individually address all of the >>> comments and change requests that were proposed in the initial >>> review. >>> >>> ___ You have a misconfigured ~/.hgrc file (i.e. username, email etc) >>> >>> ___ Your computer have a badly configured date and time; confusing the >>> the threaded patch review. >>> >>> ___ Your changes affect IPC mechanism, and you don't present any >>> results >>> for in-service upgradability test. >>> >>> ___ Your changes affect user manual and documentation, your patch >>> series >>> do not contain the patch that updates the Doxygen manual. >>> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=272487151&iu=/4140 _______________________________________________ Opensaf-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
