Question on "never use the ports/ name in code or in log entries"

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Question on "never use the ports/ name in code or in log entries"

Lior Balkohen
Mentioned from Roland, we may not use the ports/ name in code or in
log entries.  But a simple grep -R -e '<ports/' in ports results that
people have already used ports/ name in code.

Can someone tell me an elegant solution how to fix this issue without
using ports/ or - more horribly - paths like <../../...> to the
correct headers, since this is always a problem for machines they have
been in the official glibc source tree before and moved to the ports
now?

TIA.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question on "never use the ports/ name in code or in log entries"

Daniel Jacobowitz-2
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 03:16:26PM +0100, Lior Balkohen wrote:
> Mentioned from Roland, we may not use the ports/ name in code or in
> log entries.  But a simple grep -R -e '<ports/' in ports results that
> people have already used ports/ name in code.
>
> Can someone tell me an elegant solution how to fix this issue without
> using ports/ or - more horribly - paths like <../../...> to the
> correct headers, since this is always a problem for machines they have
> been in the official glibc source tree before and moved to the ports
> now?

Take a look at some of the other ways it's been fixed.  In most cases
a path starting from <sysdeps/...> is OK; that will only match the
top level of glibc, the top level of ports, and the thread libraries.

--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question on "never use the ports/ name in code or in log entries"

Lior Balkohen
2006/2/23, Daniel Jacobowitz <[hidden email]>:
> Take a look at some of the other ways it's been fixed.  In most cases
> a path starting from <sysdeps/...> is OK; that will only match the
> top level of glibc, the top level of ports, and the thread libraries.
>

that's not true:

In file included from <stdin>:1:
../ports/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/mips/mips32/sysdep.h:23:45: error:
sysdeps/unix/mips/mips32/sysdep.h: No such file or directory

it does not match the top level of ports although
sysdeps/unix/mips/mips32/sysdep.h *is* there!
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question on "never use the ports/ name in code or in log entries"

Daniel Jacobowitz-2
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 03:36:13PM +0100, Lior Balkohen wrote:

> 2006/2/23, Daniel Jacobowitz <[hidden email]>:
> > Take a look at some of the other ways it's been fixed.  In most cases
> > a path starting from <sysdeps/...> is OK; that will only match the
> > top level of glibc, the top level of ports, and the thread libraries.
> >
>
> that's not true:
>
> In file included from <stdin>:1:
> ../ports/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/mips/mips32/sysdep.h:23:45: error:
> sysdeps/unix/mips/mips32/sysdep.h: No such file or directory
>
> it does not match the top level of ports although
> sysdeps/unix/mips/mips32/sysdep.h *is* there!

Oh, right.  Roland, we discussed this a couple of months ago, IIRC -
should there be a -Iports when ports is enabled?

--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question on "never use the ports/ name in code or in log entries"

Roland McGrath
In reply to this post by Lior Balkohen
> Mentioned from Roland, we may not use the ports/ name in code or in
> log entries.  But a simple grep -R -e '<ports/' in ports results that
> people have already used ports/ name in code.

This should be fixed.  The add-on may not be called that at all.  There
should be adequate -Is to find everything.  I am about to change around how
add-ons work, so I'll be sure to fix this so it works.

You don't use ports/ in ChangeLog entries because file names in log entries
are relative to the directory containing the ChangeLog file.  For add-on
ports, each one has its own top-level ChangeLog.<cpu> file.


Thanks,
Roland
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question on "never use the ports/ name in code or in log entries"

Daniel Jacobowitz-2
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 01:58:47PM -0800, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > Mentioned from Roland, we may not use the ports/ name in code or in
> > log entries.  But a simple grep -R -e '<ports/' in ports results that
> > people have already used ports/ name in code.
>
> This should be fixed.  The add-on may not be called that at all.  There
> should be adequate -Is to find everything.  I am about to change around how
> add-ons work, so I'll be sure to fix this so it works.

Any news on this, Roland?  Otherwise I'll have to work around it some
other way for now.

--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question on "never use the ports/ name in code or in log entries"

Roland McGrath
> > This should be fixed.  The add-on may not be called that at all.  There
> > should be adequate -Is to find everything.  I am about to change around how
> > add-ons work, so I'll be sure to fix this so it works.
>
> Any news on this, Roland?  Otherwise I'll have to work around it some
> other way for now.

I am almost done revamping the add-on configury.  
I'll check something in on Monday.


Thanks,
Roland