Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library
From: Felipe Contreras <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:57:37
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 10:12 AM, John Keeping [off-list ref] wrote:
On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 08:26:32PM +0530, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote:quoted
Felipe Contreras wrote:quoted
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.clibgit.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?
Because finish_copy_notes_for_rewrite is only useful for builtin commands, so it belongs in builtin/. If there's any meaning to the ./*.o vs. builtin/*.o divide, it's for that. Otherwise we should just squash all objects into libgit.a and be done with it. -- Felipe Contreras