Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> 2008-05-01 22:04:07 Mark Phippard napisał(a):
>> On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 4:00 PM, Branko �ibej <brane_at_xbc.nu> wrote:
>>> Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
>>>> When GNOME Keyring was found, SVN_HAVE_GNOME_KEYRING is defined in
>>>> svn_private_config.h but this file is never installed.
>>>> I think that svn_auth_get_gnome_keyring_simple_provider should be always
>>>> defined but it shouldn't provide real support for GNOME Keyring when
>>>> Subversion was built without --with-gnome-keyring.
>>> Why not? Ideally the keyring store would kick in if the necessary support
>>> is detected at runtime. It seems like a shame to have two different svn
>>> executables, e.g., one for UI-less ubuntu-server and one for ubuntu-desktop.
>>> For example, the Windows CryptoAPI-based password store is always compiled
>>> in, but checks for CrytoAPI presence at runtime, so you don't need a
>>> specially compiled svn.exe for, e.g., Win98 (and all gods help anyone who's
>>> still using that).
>> I agree wholeheartedly. We (CollabNet) try to provide binaries for
>> Linux and Solaris. It would suck if we had to make one distribution
>> for people with GNOME and one for people without.
> Also distribution for KDE :)
>> I would like to be
>> able to create a distribution that does not include it and at runtime
>> if the necessary libraries are present it uses them.
> It would require creation of libsvn_subr_gnome-keyring and libsvn_subr_kwallet...
I don't get it. What's wrong with dynamically finding and loading the
Gnome or KDE libraries? Don't tell me that's harder to do on Linux than
on Windows. >:)
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-05-01 22:28:11 CEST