Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
Accumulo, mail # dev - Is C++ code still part of 1.5 release?


Copy link to this message
-
Re: Is C++ code still part of 1.5 release?
Adam Fuchs 2013-05-17, 19:11
Just to solidify the decision that Chris is already leaning towards, let me
try to clarify my position:
1. The only reason not to add the native library source code in the
-bin.tar.gz distribution is that src != bin. There is no measurable
negative effect of putting the cpp files and Makefile into the -bin.tar.gz.
2. At least one person wants the native library source code in the
-bin.tar.gz to make their life easier.

This is a very simple decision. It really doesn't matter how easy it is to
include prebuilt native code in some other way or build the code and copy
it in using some other method. Those are all tangential arguments.

Adam
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 2:49 PM, William Slacum <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I think of the native maps as an add on and they should probably be treated
> as such. I think we should consider building a different package and
> installing them separately. Personally, for development and testing, I
> don't use them.
>
> Since we're building RPMs and debian packages, the steps to install an add
> on is roughly 20 keystrokes.
>
>
> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Josh Elser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I believe I already voiced my opinion on this, but let me restate it
> since
> > the conversation is happening again.
> >
> > Bundling the native library built with a "common" library is easiest and
> I
> > believe makes the most sense. My opinion is that source files should be
> > included in a source release and that a bin release doesn't include
> source
> > files. Since we're specifically making this distinction by making these
> > releases, it doesn't make sense to me why we would decide "oh, well in
> this
> > one case, the bin dist will actually have _some_ src files too."
> >
> > Is it not intuitive that if people need to rebuild something, that they
> > download a src dist (and bin) to start? :shrug:
> >
> >
> > On 5/17/13 2:04 PM, Adam Fuchs wrote:
> >
> >> Chris,
> >>
> >> I like the idea of including the most widely used library, but empirical
> >> evidence tells me that roughly half of the users of Accumulo will still
> >> need to compile/recompile to get native map support. There is no reason
> >> not
> >> to make that as easy as possible by including the cpp code in the
> >> -bin.tar.gz -- at least I haven't heard a reason not to do that yet.
> >>
> >> Adam
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Christopher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>  Adam, I didn't make any changes on this, because there were only a few
> >>> opinions, and it didn't seem like there was a consensus. I can make
> >>> this change, though, if a consensus is established. It's very small,
> >>> and easy to do.
> >>>
> >>> Billie, any of those options would work. I'm not sure we need to
> >>> recommend a particular one over the other, as long as users know how
> >>> to get there.
> >>>
> >>> An option that Keith and I were discussing is possibly packaging
> >>> against glibc-2.5 by default, which should reduce the impact on people
> >>> using RHEL/CentOS 5, but should still work for RHEL/CentOS 6 or
> >>> anything newer (though they may have to install compat-glibc-2.5). I'm
> >>> not sure the appropriate modifications to make to get this to work,
> >>> though.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Christopher L Tubbs II
> >>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 10:49 AM, Billie Rinaldi
> >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Adam Fuchs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>  Folks,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Sorry to be late to the party, but did we come to a consensus on
> this?
> >>>>> Seems like we still have opinions both ways as to whether the cpp
> code
> >>>>> should be packaged with the binary distribution. I would argue that
> cpp
> >>>>> code is a special case, since the build is so platform dependent.
> It's
> >>>>> generally hard to distribute the right .so files to cover all
> >>>>> platforms,
> >>