On 6-6-2016 14:26, Sage Weil wrote: > On Mon, 6 Jun 2016, Willem Jan Withagen wrote: >> 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 > > I've pull up rocksdb to include those commits (though it looks like their > sha1s changed because they've been rebased). Thanx, The inards of git are still less than transparent. So I'm glad you know what to do. 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
