Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 08:26:32PM +0530, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote:
> Felipe Contreras wrote:
> > The plan is simple; make libgit.a a proper library, starting by
> > clarifying what goes into libgit.a, and what doesn't. If there's any
> > hopes of ever having a public library, it's clear what code doesn't
> > belong in libgit.a; code that is meant for builtins, that code belongs
> > in builtins/lib.a, or similar.
> >
> > Give this a try:
> >
> > --- a/sequencer.c
> > +++ b/sequencer.c
> >
> > libgit.a(sequencer.o): In function `copy_notes':
> > /home/felipec/dev/git/sequencer.c:110: undefined reference to
> > `init_copy_notes_for_rewrite'
> > /home/felipec/dev/git/sequencer.c:114: undefined reference to
> > `finish_copy_notes_for_rewrite'
> 
> This is a good example: yes, I'm convinced that the code does need to
> be reorganized.  Please resend your {sequencer.c ->
> builtin/sequencer.c} patch with this example as the rationale, and
> let's work towards improving libgit.a.

Why should sequencer.c move into builtin/ to solve this?  Why not pull
init_copy_notes_for_rewrite and finish_copy_notes_for_rewrite up into
notes.c?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]