[hipl-dev] Re: libconfig
- From: René Hummen <rene.hummen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: hipl-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 15:02:22 +0100
On 26.11.2010, at 14:50, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 08:40:56AM +0200, Miika Komu wrote:
>>
>> On 23/11/10 22:18, Diego Biurrun wrote:
>>> I think we need to decide what to do about the libconfig dependency in
>>> the firewall. I'm not sure why only the firewall needs it to parse
>>> configuration files, but hipd and hipfw should be unified in this
>>> regard.
>>>
>>> The dependency on libconfig is also not completely enforced. We claim
>>> it to be necessary in INSTALL, but not in the spec files. So the packages
>>> that get built (and we distribute) behave differently depending on whether
>>> or not libconfig was available on the system at build time or not.
>>>
>>> Since the dependency is not recorded, this might result in a package that
>>> contains binaries that are linked against libconfig without declaring a
>>> dependency on libconfig in its metadata. The result will be breakage.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>
>> as a simple solution, what about just mandating libconfig in the spec files?
>
> I'm fine with that, but then we should fail in configure if libconfig is
> not available and get rid of the #ifdefs that suggest that a configuration
> without libconfig is supported.
libconfig is currently only required for esp_token config. I would therefore
like to keep things as they are (-> optional).
> Also, IIUC libconfig is not available on CentOS 5.5, at least not without
> configuring some extra package repositories (I'd be happy to know how).
> Thus requiring libconfig basically means dropping support for CentOS 5.5.
--
Dipl.-Inform. Rene Hummen, Ph.D. Student
Chair of Communication and Distributed Systems
RWTH Aachen University, Germany
tel: +49 241 80 20772
web: http://ds.rwth-aachen.de/members/hummen
Other related posts:
