m4/virt-yajl.m4 | 14 +++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
Commit 105756660f944e7db02de3b55b98bb7c11cd03bf was too eager and did
not consider SLE 12 which still has 2.0.1 that does not ship
a pkg-config file.
Similar to how we check for readline, prefer pkg-config if available
and fall back to the old detection code if not found.
NB: this is not a clean revert because we're not reintroducing support
for YAJL 1.
Signed-off-by: Ján Tomko <jtomko@redhat.com>
Reported-by: Olaf Hering <olaf@aepfle.de>
---
m4/virt-yajl.m4 | 14 +++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/m4/virt-yajl.m4 b/m4/virt-yajl.m4
index 494e722963..05a8f8b9bd 100644
--- a/m4/virt-yajl.m4
+++ b/m4/virt-yajl.m4
@@ -24,7 +24,19 @@ AC_DEFUN([LIBVIRT_ARG_YAJL],[
AC_DEFUN([LIBVIRT_CHECK_YAJL],[
dnl YAJL JSON library http://lloyd.github.com/yajl/
- LIBVIRT_CHECK_PKG([YAJL], [yajl], [2.0.3])
+ PKG_CHECK_EXISTS([readline], [use_pkgconfig=1], [use_pkgconfig=0])
+
+ if test $use_pkgconfig = 1; then
+ dnl 2.0.3 was the version where the pkg-config file was first added
+ LIBVIRT_CHECK_PKG([YAJL], [yajl], [2.0.3])
+ else
+ dnl SUSE SLE 12 and OpenSUSE Leap 42.3 still use 2.0.1
+ dnl TODO: delete this in July 2020
+ LIBVIRT_CHECK_LIB_ALT([YAJL], [yajl],
+ [yajl_tree_parse], [yajl/yajl_common.h])
+
+ fi
+
])
AC_DEFUN([LIBVIRT_RESULT_YAJL],[
--
2.19.2
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
Am Thu, 9 May 2019 13:31:45 +0200 schrieb Ján Tomko <jtomko@redhat.com>: > + dnl TODO: delete this in July 2020 Does this come with a cost? I mean, SLE_12 is not going away any time soon. Just dropping things because we can seems to be the wrong approach. There might be other new things that must be used in libvirt, and none of the currently supported systems may have them. Olaf -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
On Thu, May 09, 2019 at 04:10:36PM +0200, Olaf Hering wrote: > Am Thu, 9 May 2019 13:31:45 +0200 > schrieb Ján Tomko <jtomko@redhat.com>: > > > + dnl TODO: delete this in July 2020 > > Does this come with a cost? I mean, SLE_12 is not going away any time soon. > Just dropping things because we can seems to be the wrong approach. Historically we almost never dropped stuff, and when we did it was completely unpredictable and arbitrary each time. Maintaining support for old software has a maint cost so it is desirable to drop things after a period of time. Thus we defined a platform support rules for when we will drop distros so that downstream vendors/ users have clear expectations: https://libvirt.org/platforms.html SLE is falls under the long life distros rule, so we have at most 2 major versions supported at any time, and the older version is dropped 2 years after the newer version is released. Our belief is that this cut off point for the old major version is long enough that people still using this older version are doing so becasue they want unchanging stable versions, not the bleeding edge. IOW, after SLE 15 has been released for 2 years, it is increasingly unlikely that most people will want to run new libvirt on SLE 12. There will always be people who are the exception to the rule, but on balance this is a good tradeoff between maint cost for libvirt vs likely usage by downstream. This same policy has also been now adopted by QEMU. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :| -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
On Thu, 2019-05-09 at 13:31 +0200, Ján Tomko wrote: > + PKG_CHECK_EXISTS([readline], [use_pkgconfig=1], [use_pkgconfig=0]) > + > + if test $use_pkgconfig = 1; then > + dnl 2.0.3 was the version where the pkg-config file was first added > + LIBVIRT_CHECK_PKG([YAJL], [yajl], [2.0.3]) > + else > + dnl SUSE SLE 12 and OpenSUSE Leap 42.3 still use 2.0.1 > + dnl TODO: delete this in July 2020 > + LIBVIRT_CHECK_LIB_ALT([YAJL], [yajl], > + [yajl_tree_parse], [yajl/yajl_common.h]) > + > + fi We're only concerned with YAJL 2 nowadays, so we should be able to use the non-ALT version of the macro here, right? Other than that, the change looks good. -- Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
© 2016 - 2024 Red Hat, Inc.