From: Arlindo da S. <da...@al...> - 2008-09-09 17:03:25
|
On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 9:28 AM, Patrice Dumas <per...@fr...> wrote: > Hello, > > Here is a simple patch for gadap > We have a version of gadap in the supplibs, and then there is the one that Jeniffer posted recently. All my builds use the supplibs version. Have you had a chance to reconcile these? It has been on my to do list but I haven't been able to get to it yet. Jennifer: have you done any comparison against the supplib sources? > * missing cstring includes > * use libdap namespace > > I don't know if the libdap namespace use causes gadap not to build with > libdap < 3.8.0 anymore. Yep, the API changes were so extensive that this is not practical. This is one of the reasons for renaming the files from "dods" to "dap". I'd suggest forgetting about versions pre 3.8.0. > If so, it'll need to be conditionalized, could > you please test it? > I can tell you: no way to use the current gadap with the old API without very tedious analysis and testing. In my view it is not worth it. > > I think that it would be nice to have shared libraries with libtool > support. Would you accept if I do that? > I thought we had that already once we autocinfiscated the gadap sources. What else do we need to do? In any event, when building the supplibs I always set "--disabled-shared --enable-static". > Also is there a repository to track your development and avoid doing > patches against old sources? That would be very convenient (and for > grads, too...). > Do you think you could update the supplib repository with yours+Jennifer patches? At least that repository will be current, and could be used as a reference for communication with Jennifer (at least it would have the history log). You can either import on a COLA vendor branch and merge, or else just overwrite what is in the trunk and check in. This would be used for supplibs-2.0.2, whenever we have a new version. I am assuming you ahve done some type of testing. Thank you, Arlindo -- Arlindo da Silva da...@al... |