Steve Greenland wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 11, 2005 at 08:02:07PM -0000, Max Bowsher wrote:
>> Steve Greenland wrote:
>> Client only-ness only applies to the compilation of svnserve. That's
>> _one_
>> C file, and _one_ program link. A tiny amount of processing compared to
>> the
>> rest of the compilation.
>>
>>> In particular, I could significant time on some of my machines if I
>>> could tell it
>>> I think they are not always passed to the sub-configures.)
>>
>> Subconfigures? The only subconfigures run are apr, apr-util, and neon.
>
> I thought I had previously posted the relevant parts of the configure
> logs; I'll need to dig them out again, I guess.
>
>>
>> Are you speaking of apr-util still looking for BDB? That's the only thing
>> I
>> can think of.
>>
>> If so, see the apr-util configure --help for appropriate flags.
>
> Ummm, if I pass --without-berkeley-db to subversion's configure, it
> needs to pass the appropriate flags to apr-util. (And it might well be: I
> don't remember the exact problem I was seeing.)
On looking into this more closely, it appears that apr-util
understands --without-berkeley-db, and the standard passing of arguments to
subconfigures should take care of this.
So, if you can find out if and why this is not happening, we want to know
about it.
>>> language bindings, etc.
>> Aren't built by default anyway.
>
> Then why are the configures looking for SWIG and Python? That I *do*
> remember.
At the moment, configure looks regardless. Not wonderful. One of the things
I want to try and fix, some time. Patches welcome.
>>> For those of us who need to support a variety of
>>> architectures locally, this would be useful.
>>
>> If you are supporting a variety of architectures, surely it can't be too
>> much trouble to write a 1-line script containing your preferred
>> ./configure
>> invocation?
>
> Nope, but that only help me.
Most cases configure should just do the right thing without special options
anyway.
>> A few emails here and there, versus a non-trivial amount of extra
>> complexity in the build-system.
>
> Is making --client-config an alias for a combination of various
> --without* and --disable* options really a big deal? (Forget not
> building svnadmin et. al., you're right, it's not that big a deal.)
I don't know whether autoconf supports options tweaking other options or
not. But is "--without-apxs --without-berkeley-db" really too much for
people to type? It's just 2 options!!!
Max.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Feb 11 22:12:36 2005