apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Max Bowsher <ma...@ukf.net>
Subject Re: [PATCH] Do not include <uuid.h> and <uuid/uuid.h> in same file
Date Sat, 25 Feb 2006 17:36:18 GMT
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Garrett Rooney wrote:
> On 2/23/06, Max Bowsher <maxb1@ukf.net> wrote:
> 
>> Another benefit of autoconf is the interface presented to users - a
>> ./configure script - is such a familiar and ubiquitous one.
> 
> +1
> 
>> I'd rate myself as competent with autoconf+libtool, and am happy to help
>> - - feel free to prod me explicitly towards any issues requiring an
>> autotool-interested person if I don't notice myself.
> 
> Fixing the libuuid detection so that it doesn't try to use libuuid if
> it can't find the appropriate header files seems to be the current
> problem.  Bill Rowe's got a system where libuuid exists, but uuid.h
> and uuid/uuid.h don't, so we end up trying to use the uuid code
> without the appropriate structure definitions, with predictable
> results.

OK, I've looked into the situation - looks simple enough to fix: just
tweaking the logic so we only enable apr_os_uuid_get if we find both a
linkable function and a header.

I've found that the patch that started this thread and committed in
r355780 actually doesn't work - the build still dies, because it tries
to use compile code using one uuid implementation using the header of
the other - I'll fix this.

I have one question: if *both* uuid implemenations are available, which
one should we prefer? The options are:

DCE/BSD <uuid.h> uuid_create() libc
e2fsprogs <uuid/uuid.h> uuid_generate() libuuid

I'm inclined to prefer the one in libc, in order to minimize dependencies.


Max.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Cygwin)

iD8DBQFEAJWSfFNSmcDyxYARAsVwAJ9ganHohbzOqsdizCoYa5gjhhxL7QCglcyD
CnTAPVCl4m7QRPetMGzO2qQ=
=AF3y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Mime
View raw message