[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[bug-inetutils] Re: DNS SRV support (patch)
From: |
Simon Josefsson |
Subject: |
[bug-inetutils] Re: DNS SRV support (patch) |
Date: |
Mon, 13 Dec 2004 21:38:19 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.110003 (No Gnus v0.3) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) |
"Alfred M. Szmidt" <address@hidden> writes:
> You could run 'gnulib-tool --import' and import every module, and
> then modify the generated Makefile to install the library and
> header files, but other than that, I don't think what you are
> asking for is possible.
>
> Why not? One could just add a configure script to gnulib and just
> compile the things that are not in glibc into this library, and then
> install it as libmisc.so or something.
Sure. I meant that this is not implemented today.
> I wouldn't agree that a shared library would make things much
> easier. It may make some things simpler, but not all things. For
> me, the benefits of having more shared stuff in gnulib rather than
> in a shared library in many cases outweigh the disadvantages.
>
> I don't see the difference, you have to install gnulib in some for to
> have it usable, be it by copying all the needed modules, or by
> installing a shared library. What benefits are you talking about for
> example?
If the maintainer is the one who copy gnulib into her project, the end
user is relieved of having to install another shared library.
I want my projects to build without any external dependencies on
compliant C89 and/or POSIX platforms, which I can achieve via gnulib.
> IMHO, InetUtils should have as few external dependencies as
> possible, to be small and easily ported, which I think would argue
> for 3).
>
> I strongly disagree with the "to be small and easily ported" part,
> this is not the goal of a GNU project. The goal is to be as usable
> and featurefull as possible, and to run on the GNU system. Now if it
> runs on non-GNU and GNU variants, then this is also good, but it isn't
> a primary goal.
I agree. I believe InetUtils can be both small and easily ported AND
usable and as featurefull as possible. These aren't necessary
orthogonal goals. It is just a small matter of good design.
In this case, InetUtils would not lose any usability or functionality
by choosing SRV via gnulib. On the other hand, without knowing
anything about RULI, I think it is possible that InetUtils may lose
the small and standalone part if InetUtils depend on RULI.
Thanks,
Simon
- Re: [bug-inetutils] Re: DNS SRV support (patch), Fabricio Matheus Goncalves, 2004/12/12
- [bug-inetutils] Re: DNS SRV support (patch), Simon Josefsson, 2004/12/12
- Re: [bug-inetutils] Re: DNS SRV support (patch), Alfred M. Szmidt, 2004/12/12
- [bug-inetutils] Re: DNS SRV support (patch), Simon Josefsson, 2004/12/12
- Re: [bug-inetutils] Re: DNS SRV support (patch), Alfred M. Szmidt, 2004/12/12
- Re: [bug-inetutils] Re: DNS SRV support (patch), Simon Josefsson, 2004/12/12
- Re: [bug-inetutils] Re: DNS SRV support (patch), Alfred M. Szmidt, 2004/12/13
- Re: [bug-inetutils] Re: DNS SRV support (patch), Alfred M. Szmidt, 2004/12/13
- [bug-inetutils] Re: DNS SRV support (patch),
Simon Josefsson <=
- Re: [bug-inetutils] Re: DNS SRV support (patch), Alfred M. Szmidt, 2004/12/13
- Re: [bug-inetutils] Re: DNS SRV support (patch), Alain Magloire, 2004/12/13
- Re: [bug-inetutils] Re: DNS SRV support (patch), Sergey Poznyakoff, 2004/12/14