[PATCHES] Turn the ConfDB into its own package

[Stephen Gallagher]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

These three patches are the first steps towards an sssd-devel package.

Patch 0001: Build the confdb as a shared library. This is so that
third-party backend implementers can access our configuration if they
choose.

Patch 0002: Add comprehensive doxygen docs for the confdb

Patch 0003: Add a -devel subpackage to the sssd.spec for the confdb and
its docs.
- -- 
Stephen Gallagher
RHCE 804006346421761

Delivering value year after year.
Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors.
http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAktsVHEACgkQeiVVYja6o6O4LQCfTI1/0NBnXW58vPUV/dr2jXDl
> TvgAn0OUqVA8lWp14jkhtNd0zDTtCR3m
> =r7rJ
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Simo Sorce]

On Fri, 05 Feb 2010 12:25:05 -0500
Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:

>  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  Hash: SHA1
>  
>  These three patches are the first steps towards an sssd-devel package.
>  
>  Patch 0001: Build the confdb as a shared library. This is so that
>  third-party backend implementers can access our configuration if they
>  choose. 
Nack,
this would turn an internal convenience API into a public API and ABI
we would have to guarantee.
This would add constraints and additional work.

Third-parties can very easily read the config file.

Simo.


-- 
Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York

[Sumit Bose]

On Fri, Feb 05, 2010 at 12:25:05PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  Hash: SHA1
>  
>  These three patches are the first steps towards an sssd-devel package.
>  
>  Patch 0001: Build the confdb as a shared library. This is so that
>  third-party backend implementers can access our configuration if they
>  choose.
>  
>  Patch 0002: Add comprehensive doxygen docs for the confdb
>  
>  Patch 0003: Add a -devel subpackage to the sssd.spec for the confdb and
>  its docs. 
I think patch 2 and 3 are still useful and should be include although I
would NACK them because of a missing 'BuildRequires: doxygen'.

bye,
Sumit

>  - -- 
>  Stephen Gallagher
>  RHCE 804006346421761
>  
>  Delivering value year after year.
>  Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors.
>  http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/
>  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>  Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
>  Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>  
>  iEYEARECAAYFAktsVHEACgkQeiVVYja6o6O4LQCfTI1/0NBnXW58vPUV/dr2jXDl
>  TvgAn0OUqVA8lWp14jkhtNd0zDTtCR3m
>  =r7rJ
>  -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Stephen Gallagher]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 02/08/2010 03:34 AM, Sumit Bose wrote:
>  On Fri, Feb 05, 2010 at 12:25:05PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>  These three patches are the first steps towards an sssd-devel package.
>  
>  Patch 0001: Build the confdb as a shared library. This is so that
>  third-party backend implementers can access our configuration if they
>  choose.
>  
>  Patch 0002: Add comprehensive doxygen docs for the confdb
>  
>  Patch 0003: Add a -devel subpackage to the sssd.spec for the confdb and
>  its docs.
>  
> > I think patch 2 and 3 are still useful and should be include although I
> > would NACK them because of a missing 'BuildRequires: doxygen'. 
I think only patch 2 makes sense at all, since if the confdb is not
going to be a public interface, we probably don't need to package its
documentation.

I've attached an updated version of patch 0002 that will not build the
documentation automatically; only when 'make docs' is run.


- -- 
Stephen Gallagher
RHCE 804006346421761

Delivering value year after year.
Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors.
http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAktxyZIACgkQeiVVYja6o6NSVgCeKVqrt4JLuvrsa3HA3rL88f4u
> Pi0An3iHFgGJAo6378Nu5hTvLWKTM8RG
> =HZEv
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Sumit Bose]

On Tue, Feb 09, 2010 at 03:46:10PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  Hash: SHA1
>  
>  On 02/08/2010 03:34 AM, Sumit Bose wrote:
>  > On Fri, Feb 05, 2010 at 12:25:05PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>  > These three patches are the first steps towards an sssd-devel package.
>  > 
>  > Patch 0001: Build the confdb as a shared library. This is so that
>  > third-party backend implementers can access our configuration if they
>  > choose.
>  > 
>  > Patch 0002: Add comprehensive doxygen docs for the confdb
>  > 
>  > Patch 0003: Add a -devel subpackage to the sssd.spec for the confdb and
>  > its docs.
>  > 
>  >> I think patch 2 and 3 are still useful and should be include although I
>  >> would NACK them because of a missing 'BuildRequires: doxygen'.
>  
>  I think only patch 2 makes sense at all, since if the confdb is not
>  going to be a public interface, we probably don't need to package its
>  documentation.
>  
>  I've attached an updated version of patch 0002 that will not build the
>  documentation automatically; only when 'make docs' is run.
>   
I have two comments:

+docs: all
+     $(MAKE) -C server $@

why do I have 'make all' before I can create the docs?

It would be nice to get a message about missing doxygen instead of
'true doxy.config' if doxygen is not installed.

bye,
Sumit

>  
>  - -- 
>  Stephen Gallagher
>  RHCE 804006346421761
>  
>  Delivering value year after year.
>  Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors.
>  http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/
>  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>  Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
>  Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>  
>  iEYEARECAAYFAktxyZIACgkQeiVVYja6o6NSVgCeKVqrt4JLuvrsa3HA3rL88f4u
>  Pi0An3iHFgGJAo6378Nu5hTvLWKTM8RG
>  =HZEv
>  -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Stephen Gallagher]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 02/12/2010 08:04 AM, Sumit Bose wrote:
>  On Tue, Feb 09, 2010 at 03:46:10PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>  On 02/08/2010 03:34 AM, Sumit Bose wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Feb 05, 2010 at 12:25:05PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> >>> These three patches are the first steps towards an sssd-devel package.
> >>>
> >>> Patch 0001: Build the confdb as a shared library. This is so that
> >>> third-party backend implementers can access our configuration if they
> >>> choose.
> >>>
> >>> Patch 0002: Add comprehensive doxygen docs for the confdb
> >>>
> >>> Patch 0003: Add a -devel subpackage to the sssd.spec for the confdb and
> >>> its docs.
> >>>
> >>>> I think patch 2 and 3 are still useful and should be include although I
> >>>> would NACK them because of a missing 'BuildRequires: doxygen'.
>  
>  I think only patch 2 makes sense at all, since if the confdb is not
>  going to be a public interface, we probably don't need to package its
>  documentation.
>  
>  I've attached an updated version of patch 0002 that will not build the
>  documentation automatically; only when 'make docs' is run.
>  
>  
> > I have two comments:
>  
> > +docs: all
> > +     $(MAKE) -C server $@
>  
> > why do I have 'make all' before I can create the docs?
>  
> > It would be nice to get a message about missing doxygen instead of
> > 'true doxy.config' if doxygen is not installed.
>   
Ah, these are leftovers from when I was building the docs as part of the
installable data (for the RPM).

We don't need the dependency on 'all', and I can change the configure
test for doxygen. Replacing $(DOXYGEN) with 'true' was there to ensure
that 'make install' didn't fail trying to build the docs.

I will prepare a new patch.

- -- 
Stephen Gallagher
RHCE 804006346421761

Delivering value year after year.
Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors.
http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkt1UugACgkQeiVVYja6o6NJ1gCgk7Ez2Ebb39aogBFEv0dSpFsN
> l3wAn2GyQVdiVV9oAZxi+o8ucuHY4gGQ
> =wSpx
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Stephen Gallagher]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 02/12/2010 08:08 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>  On 02/12/2010 08:04 AM, Sumit Bose wrote:
> >> I have two comments:
>  
> >> +docs: all
> >> +     $(MAKE) -C server $@
>  
> >> why do I have 'make all' before I can create the docs?
>  
> >> It would be nice to get a message about missing doxygen instead of
> >> 'true doxy.config' if doxygen is not installed.
>  
>  
>  Ah, these are leftovers from when I was building the docs as part of the
>  installable data (for the RPM).
>  
>  We don't need the dependency on 'all', and I can change the configure
>  test for doxygen. Replacing $(DOXYGEN) with 'true' was there to ensure
>  that 'make install' didn't fail trying to build the docs.
>  
>  I will prepare a new patch. 
New patch attached.

- -- 
Stephen Gallagher
RHCE 804006346421761

Delivering value year after year.
Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors.
http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkt1YuMACgkQeiVVYja6o6PGoACfXZGYTl3CJ9ILO9kHA3FCHfkq
> 4aEAoIO4SXPpkTtKrn8sbpNf7H5ajdrm
> =r4mF
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Stephen Gallagher]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 02/12/2010 09:17 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>  On 02/12/2010 08:08 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > On 02/12/2010 08:04 AM, Sumit Bose wrote:
> >>> I have two comments:
>  
> >>> +docs: all
> >>> +     $(MAKE) -C server $@
>  
> >>> why do I have 'make all' before I can create the docs?
>  
> >>> It would be nice to get a message about missing doxygen instead of
> >>> 'true doxy.config' if doxygen is not installed.
>  
>  
> > Ah, these are leftovers from when I was building the docs as part of the
> > installable data (for the RPM).
>  
> > We don't need the dependency on 'all', and I can change the configure
> > test for doxygen. Replacing $(DOXYGEN) with 'true' was there to ensure
> > that 'make install' didn't fail trying to build the docs.
>  
> > I will prepare a new patch.
>  
>  New patch attached.
>   

This patch uses @echo and @exit. Otherwise it is identical to the
previous one I sent.

- -- 
Stephen Gallagher
RHCE 804006346421761

Delivering value year after year.
Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors.
http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkt1dDcACgkQeiVVYja6o6NMNgCeKnwdz9+s/Pz6EG77B37mjzK3
> bxcAn11ZT8wEsEcICkhKMViivwoijU+B
> =yNZU
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Sumit Bose]

On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 10:31:04AM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  Hash: SHA1
>  
>  On 02/12/2010 09:17 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>  > On 02/12/2010 08:08 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>  >> On 02/12/2010 08:04 AM, Sumit Bose wrote:
>  >>>> I have two comments:
>  > 
>  >>>> +docs: all
>  >>>> +     $(MAKE) -C server $@
>  > 
>  >>>> why do I have 'make all' before I can create the docs?
>  > 
>  >>>> It would be nice to get a message about missing doxygen instead of
>  >>>> 'true doxy.config' if doxygen is not installed.
>  > 
>  > 
>  >> Ah, these are leftovers from when I was building the docs as part of the
>  >> installable data (for the RPM).
>  > 
>  >> We don't need the dependency on 'all', and I can change the
> configure
>  >> test for doxygen. Replacing $(DOXYGEN) with 'true' was there to ensure
>  >> that 'make install' didn't fail trying to build the docs.
>  > 
>  >> I will prepare a new patch.
>  > 
>  > New patch attached.
>  > 
>  
>  
>  This patch uses @echo and @exit. Otherwise it is identical to the
>  previous one I sent.
>   
ACK

bye,
Sumit

>  - -- 
>  Stephen Gallagher
>  RHCE 804006346421761
>  
>  Delivering value year after year.
>  Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors.
>  http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/
>  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>  Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
>  Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>  
>  iEYEARECAAYFAkt1dDcACgkQeiVVYja6o6NMNgCeKnwdz9+s/Pz6EG77B37mjzK3
>  bxcAn11ZT8wEsEcICkhKMViivwoijU+B
>  =yNZU
>  -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Stephen Gallagher]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 02/12/2010 11:11 AM, Sumit Bose wrote:
>  On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 10:31:04AM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>  
>  This patch uses @echo and @exit. Otherwise it is identical to the
>  previous one I sent.
>  
>  
> > ACK
>   
Pushed to master.

- -- 
Stephen Gallagher
RHCE 804006346421761

Delivering value year after year.
Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors.
http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkt5SjgACgkQeiVVYja6o6Ps7ACgkF4mrAA3MfVmlYVi8al8gy/9
> MqcAni+K0xXWWXnj+/YaPkQZJIcxg7qj
> =GKrx
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----