From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Harper Subject: RE: libuuid vs boost uuid Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2013 01:44:22 +0000 Message-ID: <6035A0D088A63A46850C3988ED045A4B665E29B6@BITCOM1.int.sbss.com.au> References: <6035A0D088A63A46850C3988ED045A4B665E1FB8@BITCOM1.int.sbss.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Return-path: Received: from smtp2.bendigoit.com.au ([203.16.207.99]:50138 "EHLO smtp2.bendigoit.com.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758576Ab3KJBo3 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sat, 9 Nov 2013 20:44:29 -0500 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Sage Weil Cc: "ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org" > > On Sat, 9 Nov 2013, James Harper wrote: > > Just out of curiosity (recent thread about windows port) I just had a > > quick go at compiling librados under mingw (win32 cross compile), and > > one of the errors that popped up was the lack of libuuid under mingw. > > Ceph appears to use libuuid, but I notice boost appears to include a > > uuid class too, and it seems that ceph already uses some of boost (which > > already builds under mingw). > > > > Is there anything special about libuuid that would mean boost's uuid > > class couldn't replace it? And would it be better to still use ceph's > > uuid.h as a wrapper around the boost uuid class, or to modify ceph to > > use the boost uuid class directly? > > Nice! Boost uuid looks like it would work just fine. It is probably > easier and less disruptive to use it from within the existing class in > include/uuid.h. > That seems to work (the header compiles at least), but then it falls down when things try to memcpy out of it. In particular, an fsid appears to be a char[16]. Is that a uuid? And is keeping it as a byte array an optimisation? James