[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] libxl: add support for yajl 2.x
On Mon, 2012-01-23 at 11:30 +0000, Roger Pau Monnà wrote: > 2012/1/23 Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>: > > On Tue, 2012-01-03 at 18:00 +0000, Ian Jackson wrote: > >> Ian Campbell writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] libxl: add support for > >> yajl 2.x"): > >> > On Thu, 2011-12-22 at 16:41 +0000, Roger Pau Monnà wrote: > >> > > Some autogoo stuff will be good, at least for the tools build. Can you > >> > > set up the basic structure Ian? > >> > > >> > I'm not going to have time in the near future. > >> > > >> > Would it be sufficient to have the stuff in tools/check create a > >> > config.h as well as doing the checks? Might need a bit of Makefile magic > >> > to be sure that check is always run? > >> > >> For now, I think we should not add more stuff to the critical path for > >> Xen 4.2. But after then we should switch to autoconf I think. (I > >> don't approve of automake.) > > > > It seems that yajl 2.0 support is blocked on the autoconf stuff. Can we > > disentangle things such that we can support yajl 2.0 in Xen 4.2 and > > switch to autoconf afterwards or do we have/want to make the switch to > > autoconf for 4.2? > > The proposed autoconf patch is just a convenient replacement for > tools/check scripts, which allows us to generate a makefile and a > header we can include to know the system capabilities, nothing more > was added. > > > I appreciate the concerns about critical path for 4.2. I presume > > autoconf would require more than just checking in the patches, > > specifically I'm thinking of the automated test system update and docs. > > Don't know how difficult it is to update the test bed to use the new > configure script, ideally it should only require adding "./configure" > before performing a "make tools". Since I don't know how the test bed > works, it might be necessary to pass some options to configure > execution to obtain the same result. Ian J would have to answer that one. Hopefully just running ./configure will get us as close as possible to the existing setup. FWIW the tester code is available at a git url which is in every posted set of results. Probably looking for anywhere that writes to .config would be a good start for deciding how far from the defaults it deviates (not far, I expect). > > On the other hand Roger posted v3 of his autoconf support patch and > > although I haven't got round to reviewing it yet (sorry) v2's review was > > generally positive/minor looking. > > v3 is basically a v2 with all the mentioned fixes and the output from > autoconf & automake, so we can use the configure script straight away. automake? I thought we agreed not to use that? > Anyway, this patch for adding support of yajl 2.0 needs some rework, > according to the comments made by Ian Jackson, which I will try to do > before the end of the week (sorry for the delay, but I'm quite busy > this days). Sure, no problem. I have put yajl2 support in the "nice to have column" and autoconf in a new "need to decide if this is 4.2 or 4.3 material" column. Ian. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |