[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Tue, 12 Feb 2002 20:53:59 +0100
On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 11:40:17AM -0800, Jeff Bailey wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 07:17:54PM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> > > Hey Marcus - What do you want to happen with ifconfig in the next
> > > release?
> > You can put the code in, but disabled by default. We can put good
> > use to it in the Hurd, but probably not on any other platform for
> > now.
> I think I'll leave it out for now (make dist doesn't have a good
> option for having extra code lying around).
I think we could have IU_DISABLE_CLIENT macro which does the opposite of
IU_ENABLE_CLIENT (disables it by default, and enables it otherwise). Then
we would just need to change the ENABLE to DISABLE in configure.ac.
> The Debian GNU/Hurd
> packages are likely to stay CVS-based for a while, so it's not
> important to have it in this release.
Ok for me.
> In the next release, I want to have the ability to specify per-arch
> which things should not be built (So the default will be to build
> everything). That way ifconfig can be disabled as necessary (as well
> as any other cleverness that eventually winds up in here).
Probably having IU_CLIENT(disable, foo) and IU_CLIENT(enable, foo),
then setting "status_foo = enabled" for all foos, and then case'ing on the
architectures which to set to disabled. Lateron, IU_CLIENT($status_foo,foo).
Or, of course, something entirely different :)
I am using the AM_CONDITIONAL feature in gpgme, works fine. Doesn't require
you to do the EXTRA hack we use in inetutils.
> My plan is to release on the 21st
Release whenever you feel like it, even if I could make it we should
probably not release ifconfig anyway with last minute changes of the
dimension I imagine.
> This release is basically to get something that works out there.
Very important, indeed!
`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org address@hidden
Marcus Brinkmann GNU http://www.gnu.org address@hidden