From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jim Meyering Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lib.gnulib.bugs,gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Files from gnulib Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 14:23:51 +0100 Message-ID: <87d3njpzmg.fsf@meyering.net> References: <83y66bzuhc.fsf@gnu.org> <4D3C81A1.70009@cs.ucla.edu> <83ipxfymox.fsf@gnu.org> <4D3E0A8E.1030400@cs.ucla.edu> <8362tdzl7m.fsf@gnu.org> <4D3E8E4C.1010000@cs.ucla.edu> <4D3F1171.5010201@cs.ucla.edu> <83y668yfgt.fsf@gnu.org> <4D3F3F7B.40402@cs.ucla.edu> <83ipxcy6xw.fsf@gnu.org> <4D3F70B8.3090708@cs.ucla.edu> <83d3nkxq31.fsf@gnu.org> <87oc73q5nr.fsf@meyering.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1296048249 27241 80.91.229.12 (26 Jan 2011 13:24:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 13:24:09 +0000 (UTC) Cc: cyd@stupidchicken.com, eggert@cs.ucla.edu, bug-gnulib@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnulib-bounces+gnu-bug-gnulib=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 26 14:24:03 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gnu-bug-gnulib@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Pi5Lu-0000Ht-VG for gnu-bug-gnulib@m.gmane.org; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 14:24:03 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58602 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Pi5Lu-0005xV-Ec for gnu-bug-gnulib@m.gmane.org; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 08:24:02 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=54987 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Pi5Lm-0005xG-36 for bug-gnulib@gnu.org; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 08:23:55 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Pi5Lk-0003nv-Sg for bug-gnulib@gnu.org; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 08:23:53 -0500 Original-Received: from mx.meyering.net ([82.230.74.64]:42816) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Pi5Lk-0003nn-JM; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 08:23:52 -0500 Original-Received: by rho.meyering.net (Acme Bit-Twister, from userid 1000) id 4C6B9600E1; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 14:23:51 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Wed, 26 Jan 2011 08:09:57 -0500") Original-Lines: 41 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: bug-gnulib@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Gnulib discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: bug-gnulib-bounces+gnu-bug-gnulib=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnulib-bounces+gnu-bug-gnulib=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.lib.gnulib.bugs:24968 gmane.emacs.devel:135008 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> From: Jim Meyering >> >> It is easy to run 'find' as part of the process that makes a >> >> distribution, and to put its output into config.bat or the >> >> equivalent, so there is no need to run 'find' under MS-DOS. >> > >> > More complications. This means, for example, that to test an >> > arbitrary revision of the development tree, I will need to run >> > make-dist on Unix, create a tarball, copy it to a DOS machine, then >> > build, find problems, go back to the Unix machine, etc. >> >> Nah. You wouldn't have to test at all, >> because it could be automated. See below. > > We are miscommunicating. Paul suggested that config.bat, the script > used instead of the Posix `configure' when building the MS-DOS port, > will have the list of files/directories to rename/edit hardcoded into > it by make-dist. Which means that to update config.bat, I will need There would be a rule (always run at least by "make dist") that would update config.bat. You could conceivably just run that rule, which would surely be very quick. You would not have to run the full "make dist". However, you might not have to do even that. You're presuming that people will be adding new files with conflicting name, but without updating the renaming rules required for DOS. That's where the automation comes in. If some rename-shim is required for DOS, then any build target (even "all") can require it, if it is deemed important enough. Then, if someone adds a conflicting file and does not also update the list of rename pairs, a regular "make" could fail with a diagnostic telling them what's required. That would make it the responsibility of each person adding a new conflicting file to tend to this small infrequent task, not you. > to run make-dist on a Unix host, then copy the results to the machine > where I build the DOS port, and only then build it. Just testing > doesn't solve the issue, because if testing detects a problem, the way > to correct it is very complicated (compared to what I do today -- just > edit and try again).