Re: [zones-discuss] code review request: SUNWzoneint removal
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 02:52:17PM -0400, James Carlson wrote:
> Edward Pilatowicz writes:
> > > W3 says that we shouldn't (at least) ship compilation symlinks for
> > > private libraries.
> > >
> >
> > sure, it says that. and then the first NOTE says you can ship them to
> > simplify compilation. i thought about removing these links, but then i
> > looked at libzfs and libdtrace as my examples and those seem to have the
> > "convience" compilation links as well.
>
> Not sure if you need usr/src/tools/abi/etc/exceptions entries in that
> case. Do you?
>
a fine question. as best as i can tell, no. the previously mentioned
example libraries (dtrace and zfs) don't have entries here. Also, i've
done a full nightly on both sparc and x86 with the -A flag enabled
(which runs intf_check, which seems to be the only consumer of the file
above) and that hasn't generated any errors. then just to be extra sure
i did a full sparc/x86 nightly without my changes and compared the
output from intf_check to make sure it isn't changing.
> > IPS is a development project that is targeting the ON gate, but due to
> > artifacts of the current development process, it is not currently based
> > on the ON gate. hence i don't think that IPS needs a contract to access
> > ON Consolidation Private interfaces.
>
> OK.
>
> > i don't know where Caiman plans to integrate. i would guess ON (since
> > the install gate is going away), but perhaps due to nostalgia we'll get
> > a new install gate? ;)
>
> ;-}
>
> In that case, my comments are just:
>
> - The CR is stuck in Dispatched ("nobody cares") state. It needs to
> be at least "Fix Understood" with an Evaluation included.
>
i'll update this.
> - The ABI exceptions entry isn't present ... but I have no idea what
> state the ABI tools are actually in.
>
hm. looking further at the exceptions file, i don't think it's looking
for links to libraries with only private interfaces. it seems to be
more concerned with detecting interface versioning errors introduced by
changes in scope or version number of exisiting interfaces.
i don't really thing there's anything that needs to be done here for my
changes.
thanks
ed
___
zones-discuss mailing list
zones-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [zones-discuss] code review request: SUNWzoneint removal
Edward Pilatowicz writes:
> > W3 says that we shouldn't (at least) ship compilation symlinks for
> > private libraries.
> >
>
> sure, it says that. and then the first NOTE says you can ship them to
> simplify compilation. i thought about removing these links, but then i
> looked at libzfs and libdtrace as my examples and those seem to have the
> "convience" compilation links as well.
Not sure if you need usr/src/tools/abi/etc/exceptions entries in that
case. Do you?
> IPS is a development project that is targeting the ON gate, but due to
> artifacts of the current development process, it is not currently based
> on the ON gate. hence i don't think that IPS needs a contract to access
> ON Consolidation Private interfaces.
OK.
> i don't know where Caiman plans to integrate. i would guess ON (since
> the install gate is going away), but perhaps due to nostalgia we'll get
> a new install gate? ;)
;-}
In that case, my comments are just:
- The CR is stuck in Dispatched ("nobody cares") state. It needs to
be at least "Fix Understood" with an Evaluation included.
- The ABI exceptions entry isn't present ... but I have no idea what
state the ABI tools are actually in.
--
James Carlson, Solaris Networking
Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
___
zones-discuss mailing list
zones-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [zones-discuss] code review request: SUNWzoneint removal
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 08:23:43AM -0400, James Carlson wrote: > Edward Pilatowicz writes: > > http://cr.opensolaris.org/~edp/onnv-headers1/ > > 6851400 SUNWzoneint files should be moved to SUNWzoneu > > > > i'm eliminating the SUNWzoneint package because there really is no good > > reason not to ship these header files and lint libraries. > > They weren't shipped because the libraries are Consolidation Private. > Per the library best practices document: > > http://sac.sfbay/cgi-bin/bp.cgi?NAME=Libraries.bp > > W3 says that we shouldn't (at least) ship compilation symlinks for > private libraries. > sure, it says that. and then the first NOTE says you can ship them to simplify compilation. i thought about removing these links, but then i looked at libzfs and libdtrace as my examples and those seem to have the "convience" compilation links as well. that said, personally i don't really care if they are present or not as long as things continue to compile. if you'd like i could try removing them and seeing how builds go. > Because they are contracted for use outside of ON, they were put into > SUNWzoneint for build machines. I agree that it's annoying at best, > but it is part of the current "best practices." > i know why they weren't shipped. but we already ship lots of libraries + lint libraries + headers files for stuff that only contains private interfaces. also, W3 does have plenty of NOTEs which document cases where shipping these things is appropriate. i believe that in this case shipping this stuff is appropriate. > > they are > > already needed for building the caiman gate, and i want to use them for > > functionality in the ips gate as well. > > So ... are these libraries now some form of Public interface? Or will > IPS and Caiman have contracts, and is this just an exception to the > usual rules? > IPS is a development project that is targeting the ON gate, but due to artifacts of the current development process, it is not currently based on the ON gate. hence i don't think that IPS needs a contract to access ON Consolidation Private interfaces. i don't know where Caiman plans to integrate. i would guess ON (since the install gate is going away), but perhaps due to nostalgia we'll get a new install gate? ;) ed ___ zones-discuss mailing list zones-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [zones-discuss] code review request: SUNWzoneint removal
Edward Pilatowicz writes: > http://cr.opensolaris.org/~edp/onnv-headers1/ > 6851400 SUNWzoneint files should be moved to SUNWzoneu > > i'm eliminating the SUNWzoneint package because there really is no good > reason not to ship these header files and lint libraries. They weren't shipped because the libraries are Consolidation Private. Per the library best practices document: http://sac.sfbay/cgi-bin/bp.cgi?NAME=Libraries.bp W3 says that we shouldn't (at least) ship compilation symlinks for private libraries. Because they are contracted for use outside of ON, they were put into SUNWzoneint for build machines. I agree that it's annoying at best, but it is part of the current "best practices." > they are > already needed for building the caiman gate, and i want to use them for > functionality in the ips gate as well. So ... are these libraries now some form of Public interface? Or will IPS and Caiman have contracts, and is this just an exception to the usual rules? -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 ___ zones-discuss mailing list zones-discuss@opensolaris.org
