On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 06:36:36PM +0100, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote: > Could you elaborate on the two solutions and how the differ (are > better) than just adding the proper libraries to HURDLIBS?
``Adding the proper libraries to HURDLIBS'' is basically the first sugestion, combined with a reliable mechanism to make sure that discrepancies will always be noticed (and do not lead to at first incomprehensible--like in the example I gave--or--maybe even more dangerous--silent breakage). This could be implemented by checking each generated dependency file about not including any files from `/.*include/hurd/'. Solution two is splitting the Hurd `collecting box' into a lot of smaller, independent packages. There would be a package `libihash', which is configured, built and installed into /lib/ and /include/ and then the packages that depend on libihash's functionality can be configured and built, using the libihash that was previously installed into /lib/ and /include/. Etc. Obviously this leads to a lot of packages, given the number of `functional units' that are contained in the current Hurd `collecting box'. The question is, whether parts of them can be combined reasonably, reducing the number of packages the Hurd would be split into. This second suggestion is relevant, because we have to decide which libraries and translators should be part of the main Hurd package and which shouldn't. Why is `ftpfs' part of it, but not `httpfs', `smbfs' or `gopherfs'. And now, don't say ``because those three are not mature enough'' (which `ftpfs' also isn't: there is e.g. no write support iIrc); there will be the day they are mature enough and will they be included then? Will `reiserfs', `romfs', `ext3fs', `xfs', `zfs', `lvm', `pfinet_ipv6', `ethernet_bridge', `cvsfs', `gnu_arch_fs', `tarfs', `xmlfs', `rollover', `contabfs', etc. also be included? Likewise for the libraries. Or the other way round: why are `fatfs' and `ufs' part of the main Hurd package, apart from historical reasons, under the assumtion that they are not widely used. Where will be the boundary for inclusion vs. refusal of inclusion? I think we agree that the core Hurd package can not contain each and every translator people come up with. Regards, Thomas _______________________________________________ Bug-hurd mailing list Bug-hurd@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
