Re: [PATCH] libc/eglibc: add an option to enable obsolete RPC building

[Bryan Hundven <bryanhundven at gmail dot com>]

On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 6:07 AM, Bryan Hundven <bryanhundven@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 6:05 AM, Yann E. MORIN <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> wrote:
>> Florian, Bryan, All,
>>
>> On Wednesday 17 October 2012 14:35:21 Florian Fainelli wrote:
>>> On Wednesday 17 October 2012 14:31:28 Yann E. MORIN wrote:
>>> > Florian, Bryan, All,
>>> >
>>> > On Wednesday 17 October 2012 14:06:43 Bryan Hundven wrote:
>>> > > On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 4:43 AM, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > > > # HG changeset patch
>>> > > > # User Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
>>> > > > # Date 1349256753 -7200
>>> > > > # Node ID 7f6ddb2b0ca0d89fa5bc98c1deb55d840b505ccd
>>> > > > # Parent  43ace4bb005eef085437e3d4fbaef528ef0ef005
>>> > > > [PATCH] libc/eglibc: add an option to enable obsolete RPC building
>>> >
>>> > Florian, OK, looks good :-) I will look at it tonight when back home.
>>> > Thank you!
>>> >
>>> > > Wouldn't this affect glibc-2.16 as well? In that case, it maybe better
>>> > > to put this in glibc-eglibc.sh-common, so when glibc-2.16 is added to
>>> > > ct-ng, it will just work (famous last words).
>>> >
>>> > Bryan, the code is already in glibc-eglibc-common, only the option is
>>> > specific to eglibc.
>>> >
>>> > We do not have glibc-2.16 yet in ct-ng. When/if someone pushes a patch to
>>> > add glibc-2.16, _then_ we can think of a way to move the option to the
>>> > common area.
>>>
>>> Bryan's concern looks valid to me, so if you want me to respin with this
>>> addressed, I really do not mind.
>>
>> In that case, please add:
>>     config LIBC_GLIBC_HAS_OBSOLETE_SUNRPC
>>         bool
>>
>>     config LIBC_GLIBC_ENABLE_OBSOLETE_SUNRPC
>>         bool
>>         prompt "Enable obsoloete sunrpc"
>>         depends on LIBC_GLIBC_HAS_OBSOLETE_SUNRPC
>>
>> Then (e)glibc versions that have support for obsoloete sunrpc can 'select'
>> the LIBC_GLIBC_HAS_OBSOLETE_SUNRPC symbol, and the option becomes visible.
>>
>> While you are at it, could you spin a patch that basically adds:
>>     config LIBC_GLIBC_MISSES_SUNRPC
>>         bool
>>
>>     comment "This version of (e)glibc does *not* have sunrpc"
>>         depends on LIBC_GLIBC_MISSES_SUNRPC
>>
>> Then (e)glibc (both 2.14 and 2.15, IIRC) versions that do not have sunrpc at
>> all can select the LIBC_GLIBC_MISSES_SUNRPC symbol, and the warning becomes
>> visible.
>
> It should just be 2.15 and 2.16+

I digress, 2.14+

>> Regards,
>> Yann E. MORIN.
>>
>> --
>> .-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
>> |  Yann E. MORIN  | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
>> | +0/33 662376056 | Software  Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN     |   ^                |
>> | --==< O_o >==-- '------------.-------:  X  AGAINST      |  /e\  There is no  |
>> | http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | (*_*) | / \ HTML MAIL    |  """  conspiracy.  |
>> '------------------------------'-------'------------------'--------------------'
>
> -Bryan

-Bryan

--
For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq