bug-gnu-arch
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

[Bug-gnu-arch] [bug #5573] includes in multi-tree projects


From: nobody
Subject: [Bug-gnu-arch] [bug #5573] includes in multi-tree projects
Date: Sun, 05 Oct 2003 20:30:25 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030519 Mozilla Firebird/0.6

=================== BUG #5573: LATEST MODIFICATIONS ==================
http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?func=detailbug&bug_id=5573&group_id=4899

Changes by: Miles Bader <address@hidden>
Date: Mon 10/06/2003 at 09:30 (Asia/Tokyo)

------------------ Additional Follow-up Comments ----------------------------
I would suggest using `/include' or `/include/', on the theory that directories 
in configs should always be relative, and that `/' seems more `obviously 
special' than `,', especially for someone not entirely familiar with arch's 
naming conventions (and the slash looks nicer too :-).





=================== BUG #5573: FULL BUG SNAPSHOT ===================


Submitted by: cehteh                  Project: GNU arch -- a revision control 
system
Submitted on: Fri 09/26/2003 at 02:17
Category:  tla                        Severity:  5 - Major                  
Bug Group:  small feature idea        Resolution:  None                     
Status:  Feedback                     Release:                              
Fixed Release:                        Merge Request?:  yes -- merge from my 
archive
Your Archive Name:  address@hidden Archive Location:  
http://cehteh.homeunix.org/arch/cehteh000
Assigned to:  None                    

Summary:  includes in multi-tree projects

Original Submission:  address@hidden/tla--devo--1.1--patch-1

    added 'include' directive to multi-tree config files

address@hidden/tla--devo--1.1--patch-2

    fixed tracker and somewhat tested



docs at:

http://cehteh.homeunix.org/pipawiki/HowToSetupArch_2fHowToSetupMultiTreeProjects



cya Christian

Follow-up Comments
*******************

-------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon 10/06/2003 at 09:30       By: miles
I would suggest using `/include' or `/include/', on the theory that directories 
in configs should always be relative, and that `/' seems more `obviously 
special' than `,', especially for someone not entirely familiar with arch's 
naming conventions (and the slash looks nicer too :-).



-------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon 10/06/2003 at 03:57       By: cehteh
Robert Collins made the suggestion to use ',include' since dirnames with 
preceeding commas are already junk names and not valid. I will implement that 
now and hopefully that will satisfiy all people



Christian

-------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun 10/05/2003 at 02:51       By: cehteh
please don't just say "No, thats bad." without a better suggestion :) ... I 
considered a lot of syntax ideas but i still dont have a better one.



It would be quite simple to add a "%include" where "%" is some arbitiary 
choosen character, but this could clash if someone names directories in some 
weird sense, so it would need some escaping rules .. doh!



"#include" ... as #.. are comments so far .. ranged out, theres very likely 
someone out there who started a comment with that. 



My first idea was to treat a line which start with whitespaces as include line 
(no keyword required) .. but thats also ranged out, not clear enough.



Further in my opinion the parser should not be forgiving on formatting errors 
.. that makes it harder for other tools to parse such a files correct, but it 
must generate very precise error messages when sometihng is wrong, so that the 
user can fix it easily. Btw: currently it is not very good in that area, tried 
to postfix a configdir with a "/"? If you dont know that it doenst work you get 
some serious problem in tracking it down.





Christian



-------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat 10/04/2003 at 13:02       By: miles
> think this would NOT clash because all managed

> directories should be relative to './'. I would 

> rather add code which rejects configs without a 

> leading './' and trailing '/' for subdir names. I 

> thought we agreed on this on IRC?

> changing 'include' to '%include' or something else 

> shouldn't make a problem but is still ambiguous, the 

> './' prefix for subdirs is the best way imo.



No.  That's bad.



For users, ./ is a no-op; as far as I know, it's part of automatically 
generated configs only because of an arbitrary implementation detail; to make 
it mandatory would seem arbitrary and annoying.  Remember, configs are a 
user-interface too, so arch should be forgiving  in parsing it.



-------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat 10/04/2003 at 12:29       By: cehteh
.. back from hollyday



>Could you please make some cleanups to this?



Sure



> a rel_table or assoc_table will do just as well.



I need to check that out, i'm still not familar enough with libhackerlab.

  

>arch_read_config can be a wrapper

>function that calls arch_read_config_internal (a staticly

>declared function) with extra parameters.



Ok, well but:

Currently it semms to be not a problem if libarch is not threadsafe, i had no 
time to ask you about future directions, so i made the decision on myself to 
make it threadsafe there (yes my patch is not very elegant there). Other 
changes *would* require at least one additional user supplied argument 
(assoc_table* ?) to keep the state for the current run. Please tell me ur 
opinion.

  

> The particular include syntax is an interesting idea but

> won't quite cut it, i'm afraid. The problem is: what if

> I have a subdir named "include"? The syntax you chose

> might break some existing configs, and will lead to

> confusing errors in future configs.



I think this would NOT clash because all managed directories  should be 
relative to './'. I would rather add code which rejects configs without a 
leading './' and trailing '/' for subdir names. I thought we agreed on this on 
IRC?

changing 'include' to '%include' or something else shouldn't make a problem but 
is still ambiguous, the './' prefix for subdirs is the best way imo.



Would you allow absolute subdir paths? i think thats a bad idea.



> Minor formatting issues.... 



Yeah, was in a hurry before hollydays, and ususally i dont use that style.







Cheers Christian

-------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun 09/28/2003 at 07:27       By: tomlord
Could you please make some cleanups to this?



In particular:



There is no need for the type `struct arch_file_list': a

rel_table or assoc_table will do just as well.



The parameters to arch_read_config should not need to

change.   Instead, arch_read_config can be a wrapper

function that calls arch_read_config_internal (a staticly

declared function) with extra parameters.



The particular include syntax is an interesting idea but

won't quite cut it, i'm afraid.   The problem is:  what if 

I have a subdir named "include"?   The syntax you chose 

might break some existing configs, and will lead to

confusing errors in future configs.



Minor formatting issues.... Please:



put a space after `for' but not after the '('.  



put spaces around '=' in assignments.



put a space between the function name and the '(' in

function calls.  Do not put a space after the '('.



put spaces around the '==' in comparisons -- around all

binary operators in general.



put a blank line between local variable declarations and the

rest of the code in the block



don't put a space before ')' in an `if'






CC list is empty


No files currently attached


For detailed info, follow this link:
http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?func=detailbug&bug_id=5573&group_id=4899

_______________________________________________
  Message sent via/by Savannah
  http://savannah.gnu.org/





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]