[Freeipa-devel] client-only FreeIPA build

[Lukas Slebodnik]

On (24/11/16 10:27), Petr Spacek wrote:
>On 23.11.2016 13:53, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>> On (22/11/16 11:25), Rob Crittenden wrote:
>>> Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>>>> On (22/11/16 16:29), Petr Spacek wrote:
>>>>> On 22.11.2016 16:27, Jan Cholasta wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 22.11.2016 16:04, Petr Spacek wrote:
>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the recent changes with regard to
>>>>>>> http://www.freeipa.org/page/V4/Integration_Improvements
>>>>>>> beg a question whether we should invest into supporting client-only builds in
>>>>>>> FreeIPA build system.
>>>
>>> Note that the Integration efforts don't really apply. The client-only
>>> install is for doing client enrollment and integration can mean lots of
>>> things.
>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Right now, FreeIPA can be built on all architectures we care about so there is
>>>>>>> no incentive to invest into client-only build - this applies to binary/RPM
>>>>>>> builds.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Client-only build lowers the barrier for porting IPA to new platforms (porting
>>>>>> only client code is *much* easier than porting the whole thing), so I would
>>>>>> very much prefer if we kept it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Understood.
>>>>>
>>>> Agree about portability
>>>>
>>>> But upstream spec file needn't have such relicts.
>>>> The upstream spec file is pure fedora specific.
>>>
>>> The upstream spec is what is used to document and verify that the
>>> client-only build actually works.
>>>
>>> I also think it is a worthy goal to maintain.
>>>
>> Maintaing is not enough. It would be also good to test it.
>> 
>> And maybe it might be much simpler to have separate
>> spec file for client only build. Because too many if conditions
>> does not improve readability of spec file. But that's up to
>> others to decide what would be simpler.
>
>The maintenance cost you mention is the only con I can see.
>
>I think that if we decide to support it, client-only support should be part of
>configure machinery. It would enable packagers to simply run
>./configure --disable-server && make install
>and have the client installed. It would make easy to package it for whatever
>distro.
>
I didn't mention anything about spec file only solution
for client only build.

But too many optional features does not improve readability
in spec file.

We have many optional features in upstream sssd spec file.
e.g.
%configure \

   //snip

    --disable-static \
    --disable-rpath \
%if %{with sssd_user}
    --with-sssd-user=sssd \
%endif
    %{with_initscript} \
    %{?with_syslog} \
    %{?with_cifs_utils_plugin_option} \
    %{?with_python3_option} \
    %{?enable_polkit_rules_option} \
    %{?enable_systemtap_opt} \
    %{?experimental}

But there are also optional features which
are not coverent in umpstrema spec file
otherwise the spec file would not be maintanable.

e.g. --with-samba

But as I mention in previous mail its up to you
to decide whether client only build should
be handled in upstream spec file or in separate spec file.

LS