Re: libposix

[Bruce Korb]

On 11/07/10 10:45, Sylvain Beucler wrote:
> That sounds good, and this also sounds like quite a change from the
> current gnulib.

Hi Sylvain,

As you may be aware, configuring for a build can take up the
bulk of the build time for a project.  There is no intention
of preventing projects from continuing to spend all this time
every time one wants to build it.  The idea is to _allow_
projects to test for libposix and go forward if present and
stop if not.  Only libposix has to go through the long configure
process.

> As far as I understand, gnulib performs tests at ./configure time to
> decide whether to use the gnulib replacement, or rely on the
> decent-enough and hopefully-optimized system version.
> I wonder how this will be done with libposix: will the replacement be
> used in any case?

You write your project code to presume libposix is present and
then you add something like -I/usr/local/include/libposix at the
head of your include list and -L/usr/local/lib -lposix to your link.

> Also, it sounds like libposix can be handled as a classical library
> dependency, which will probably make distros feel safer, thanks to the
> absence of code replication in every project that use it.

That's the idea.

> Bruce also wrote it will be versioned, which hints at some kind of
> release process.

Along the lines of the gnulib releases.  Contrary to what is said
on www.gnu.org/software/gnulib/, there is actually a periodic release.
I forget where now.

> This sounds (to me) so U-turn to gnulib that I want to get
> confirmation, maybe I missed something :)

Not a U-turn.  An *al*ternative.  :)  - Bruce