pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Multi-lib support problem & possible fix

To: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Multi-lib support problem & possible fix
From: fche@xxxxxxxxxx (Frank Ch. Eigler)
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 11:13:48 -0500
Cc: pcp developers <pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <2079478185.15183762.1390974204857.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxx> (Nathan Scott's message of "Wed, 29 Jan 2014 00:43:24 -0500 (EST)")
References: <1288830274.15173866.1390972567394.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxx> <2079478185.15183762.1390974204857.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux)
Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> [...]
> There is a section of /etc/pcp.conf which doesn't meet this
> need and that is these two lines ...
>
>   PCP_LIB_DIR=/usr/lib64
>   PCP_LIB32_DIR=/usr/lib
>
> I initially looked at simply removing these, since they are not used
> in the source code directly.  However, I later on found they are
> used in builddefs/buildmacros, which might be used when a third
> party is building software using pcp-libs [...]

How about a change consisting of moving those two definitions from
pcp.conf into builddefs, and likely builddefs/buildmacros into
pcp-libs-devel?

If the pcp sources we ship continue working, and our pmdas continue
installing, that's good enough.  We shouldn't hold back cleanups on
the basis of hypothetical third party packages that could very well
work with the changes.  This is not like a major API/ABI break.

- FChE

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>