On 25-2-2016 21:21, Nathan Cutler wrote: > On 02/24/2016 06:58 PM, Ken Dreyer wrote: >> I'm really interested in getting our various bundled libraries into >> separate packages. > > +1 ! > >> Does ceph's rocksdb have a lot of changes from rocksdb upstream? If >> so, I'm leaning towards packaging this as "ceph-rocksdb" until those >> changes are present in an upstream rocksdb release. > > How about "rocksdb-ceph" for the name? To me the first component > (rocksdb) expresses what the package *is* (i.e. what you get when you > install it) and the second component (ceph) expresses the "flavor". > > And does this mean I now have a green light for "civetweb-ceph"? ;-) > > All the submodules should be separate packages IMO. > > Also the tool "ceph-detect-init" seems like it deserves an independent > existence. > I know that this discussion has run for some time. And when I build a fresh clone, I ended up with a more recent rocksdb than that I'd liked.... (or actual Clang) But 3 trivial fixes further I could again compile, so I've committed those to the Rocksdb github, and they got accepted this morning. Now the trick question here is: How do they end up in the src/rocksdb tree? for convenience sake the hashes: 131397f 69baec6 deba7f6 thanx, --WjW -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
