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

Re: cdebconf state

* Randolph Chung 

| > cdebconf has been a bit, well, unstable for the last month or so,
| > after Randolph Chung started a rewrite of it.  it should now be
| > stabilizing, after he, Colin Walters and I've been hacking on it
| > irregularly for some time.  Also, the rfc822 backend has been switched
| > to use hash tables instead of linked lists, since that was a lot
| > cleaner -- the supporting library is in the table/ subdirectory off
| > the rfc822db dir.
| argh.. instead of this can we just use the binary-tree stuff in glibc?
| no use in reinventing possibly buggy data structure code if we can avoid
| it.

Well, it works. :)  So, I'd rather not change it again.  Also, I don't
know the binary-tree stuff in glibc.  I kinda know this hash library
by now.

| > Hopefully we won't have too many other large rewrites like this one,
| > since they set us back quite a bit.
| well, the rewrite is needed to improve debconf compatibility. i think we
| are much closer now, and hopefully we'll just try to track debconf
| changes once the current cdebconf code stablizes.

yup, that's good.

| > Randolph, could you please review the changes and upload (or just say
| > go and I'll upload)?
| it's on my list of TODOs... unfortunately things are quite busy with
| work and other RL commitments at the moment.

ok, you want me to upload for now?  I have something which seems to be
stable, and getting stuff built for 0.2 would be nice, since we could
then concentrate on other stuff for a little while.

Tollef Fog Heen                                                        ,''`.
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are      : :' :
                                                                      `. `' 

Reply to: