You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to commits@subversion.apache.org by st...@apache.org on 2012/09/17 18:29:26 UTC
svn commit: r1386696 - /subversion/trunk/configure.ac
Author: stsp
Date: Mon Sep 17 16:29:25 2012
New Revision: 1386696
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1386696&view=rev
Log:
* configure.ac: Don't raise a fatal error if --with-gnome-kerying was passed
but the necessary things can't be found. Just print a warning and move on
without compiling GNOME Kerying support.
Modified:
subversion/trunk/configure.ac
Modified: subversion/trunk/configure.ac
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/trunk/configure.ac?rev=1386696&r1=1386695&r2=1386696&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- subversion/trunk/configure.ac (original)
+++ subversion/trunk/configure.ac Mon Sep 17 16:29:25 2012
@@ -587,17 +587,16 @@ if test "$with_gnome_keyring" != "no"; t
SVN_GNOME_KEYRING_LIBS="`$PKG_CONFIG --libs glib-2.0 gnome-keyring-1`"
else
AC_MSG_RESULT([no])
- AC_MSG_ERROR([cannot find GNOME Keyring])
fi
else
AC_MSG_RESULT([no])
- AC_MSG_ERROR([cannot find GLib and GNOME Keyring .pc files])
+ AC_MSG_WARN([cannot find GLib and GNOME Keyring .pc files. GNOME Keyring disabled.])
fi
else
- AC_MSG_ERROR([cannot find pkg-config])
+ AC_MSG_WARN([cannot find pkg-config. GNOME Keyring disabled.])
fi
else
- AC_MSG_ERROR([APR does not have support for DSOs])
+ AC_MSG_WARN([APR does not have support for DSOs. GNOME Keyring disabled.])
fi
else
AC_MSG_ERROR([--with-gnome-keyring conflicts with --disable-shared])
Re: svn commit: r1386696 - /subversion/trunk/configure.ac
Posted by Stefan Sperling <st...@elego.de>.
On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 11:05:55AM +0100, Philip Martin wrote:
> stsp@apache.org writes:
>
> > Author: stsp
> > Date: Mon Sep 17 16:29:25 2012
> > New Revision: 1386696
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1386696&view=rev
> > Log:
> > * configure.ac: Don't raise a fatal error if --with-gnome-kerying was passed
> > but the necessary things can't be found. Just print a warning and move on
> > without compiling GNOME Kerying support.
>
> Is that sensible behaviour? I think it's a bit odd to continue without
> gnome keyring support if the user explicity requested it.
Before my change, there was no way of saying
a) "please use GNOME keyring if you can find it, else, don't bother"
It was either
b) "don't compile GNOME keyring support" or
c) "error out if it cannot be compiled in"
With my change, we now have a) and b), but not c).
I want to eventually compile GNOME keyring support on the bb-openbsd
bot, because currently no bot is even trying to compile it, as far
as I can tell. But I don't necessarily want the build on that bot
to fail if the gnome keyring packages happen not to be installed
(which they aren't yet).
If you want c), we could look for GNOME keyring by default, enable it
if found, and then change the semantics of --with-gnome-kerying back
to "error out if gnome keyring isn't found". That would restore all
possible behaviour options.
Re: svn commit: r1386696 - /subversion/trunk/configure.ac
Posted by Ben Reser <be...@reser.org>.
On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 4:24 AM, Philip Martin
<ph...@wandisco.com> wrote:
> That sounds like the wrong behaviour as well. By default we should
> build as many stable features as possible. If I pass an explict option
> to enable/disable a feature that should be a hard requirement.
+1
In fact I was noticing today that in order to build a client with http
support (I'm hesitant to call it webdav anymore), you have to pass
--with-serf. Making matters worse you have to pass the prefix, just
pasing --with-serf without a value fails. In 1.7.x (and previous
releases) neon would be found without any effort to turn it on. I'm
guessing this was an oversite when neon support was removed and serf
became the default.
Unless anyone has any objections I'll fix this tomorrow. I can't
imagine that there are very many people that want a client without
http support.
Re: svn commit: r1386696 - /subversion/trunk/configure.ac
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>.
On Sep 18, 2012 9:08 AM, "Stefan Sperling" <st...@elego.de> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 10:02:59AM -0400, Greg Stein wrote:
> > On Sep 18, 2012 4:31 AM, "Justin Erenkrantz" <ju...@erenkrantz.com>
wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 7:24 AM, Philip Martin
> > > <ph...@wandisco.com> wrote:
> > > > That sounds like the wrong behaviour as well. By default we should
> > > > build as many stable features as possible. If I pass an explict
option
> > > > to enable/disable a feature that should be a hard requirement.
> > >
> > > +1. -- justin
> >
> > +1
>
> I made this happen for gnome keyring in r1387230.
Thanks!
Re: svn commit: r1386696 - /subversion/trunk/configure.ac
Posted by Stefan Sperling <st...@elego.de>.
On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 10:02:59AM -0400, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Sep 18, 2012 4:31 AM, "Justin Erenkrantz" <ju...@erenkrantz.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 7:24 AM, Philip Martin
> > <ph...@wandisco.com> wrote:
> > > That sounds like the wrong behaviour as well. By default we should
> > > build as many stable features as possible. If I pass an explict option
> > > to enable/disable a feature that should be a hard requirement.
> >
> > +1. -- justin
>
> +1
I made this happen for gnome keyring in r1387230.
Re: svn commit: r1386696 - /subversion/trunk/configure.ac
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>.
On Sep 18, 2012 4:31 AM, "Justin Erenkrantz" <ju...@erenkrantz.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 7:24 AM, Philip Martin
> <ph...@wandisco.com> wrote:
> > That sounds like the wrong behaviour as well. By default we should
> > build as many stable features as possible. If I pass an explict option
> > to enable/disable a feature that should be a hard requirement.
>
> +1. -- justin
+1
Re: svn commit: r1386696 - /subversion/trunk/configure.ac
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 7:24 AM, Philip Martin
<ph...@wandisco.com> wrote:
> That sounds like the wrong behaviour as well. By default we should
> build as many stable features as possible. If I pass an explict option
> to enable/disable a feature that should be a hard requirement.
+1. -- justin
Re: svn commit: r1386696 - /subversion/trunk/configure.ac
Posted by Philip Martin <ph...@wandisco.com>.
Branko Čibej <br...@wandisco.com> writes:
> On 18.09.2012 12:05, Philip Martin wrote:
>> stsp@apache.org writes:
>>
>>> Author: stsp
>>> Date: Mon Sep 17 16:29:25 2012
>>> New Revision: 1386696
>>>
>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1386696&view=rev
>>> Log:
>>> * configure.ac: Don't raise a fatal error if --with-gnome-kerying was passed
>>> but the necessary things can't be found. Just print a warning and move on
>>> without compiling GNOME Kerying support.
>> Is that sensible behaviour? I think it's a bit odd to continue without
>> gnome keyring support if the user explicity requested it.
>
> We've always done that for Apache module support.
That sounds like the wrong behaviour as well. By default we should
build as many stable features as possible. If I pass an explict option
to enable/disable a feature that should be a hard requirement.
--
Certified & Supported Apache Subversion Downloads:
http://www.wandisco.com/subversion/download
Re: svn commit: r1386696 - /subversion/trunk/configure.ac
Posted by Branko Čibej <br...@wandisco.com>.
On 18.09.2012 12:05, Philip Martin wrote:
> stsp@apache.org writes:
>
>> Author: stsp
>> Date: Mon Sep 17 16:29:25 2012
>> New Revision: 1386696
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1386696&view=rev
>> Log:
>> * configure.ac: Don't raise a fatal error if --with-gnome-kerying was passed
>> but the necessary things can't be found. Just print a warning and move on
>> without compiling GNOME Kerying support.
> Is that sensible behaviour? I think it's a bit odd to continue without
> gnome keyring support if the user explicity requested it.
We've always done that for Apache module support.
-- Brane
--
Certified & Supported Apache Subversion Downloads:
http://www.wandisco.com/subversion/download
Re: svn commit: r1386696 - /subversion/trunk/configure.ac
Posted by Philip Martin <ph...@wandisco.com>.
stsp@apache.org writes:
> Author: stsp
> Date: Mon Sep 17 16:29:25 2012
> New Revision: 1386696
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1386696&view=rev
> Log:
> * configure.ac: Don't raise a fatal error if --with-gnome-kerying was passed
> but the necessary things can't be found. Just print a warning and move on
> without compiling GNOME Kerying support.
Is that sensible behaviour? I think it's a bit odd to continue without
gnome keyring support if the user explicity requested it.
--
Philip