Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship




Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date. GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.
c.f. bug 424647
List Archive: gentoo-dev
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: gentoo-dev@g.o
From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o>
Subject: Re: [PATCH eutils] Move remove_libtool_files() from autotools-utils for wider use.
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 02:09:11 -0400
On Thursday 31 May 2012 01:46:41 Michał Górny wrote:
> On Wed, 30 May 2012 17:19:49 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Monday 28 May 2012 03:58:56 Michał Górny wrote:
> > > +# @USAGE: [all]
> > 
> > this is incorrect.  the usage is:
> > 	<all | files to remove>
> 
> No, it's perfectly valid. Moreover, it even explains what the function
> actually does rather than your imagination.

why are you so angry all the time ?  try being less confrontational for once.

going from the usage:
	remove_libtool_files [all]

that means this may be called in only two ways:
1)	remove_libtool_files
2)	remove_libtool_files all

yet, if you read the actual code, you'll see:
+	[[ ${#} -le 1 ]] || die "Invalid number of args to ${FUNCNAME}()"
+	if [[ ${#} -eq 1 ]]; then
+	...
+	fi

that means if more than 1 argument is passed, no error is thrown.  i thought 
you were intending to parse $@ further on because of it (hence the suggestion 
of updating the @USAGE), but it looks merely like your arg parsing is 
incorrect and needs fixing.  probably easiest by doing:
	case $#:$1 in
	0:'') ;;
	1:all) removing_all=1 ;;
	*) die "invalid usage" ;;
	esac

> > although, since we don't call die or anything, we can pipeline it to
> > speed things up a bit:
> > 	pc_libs=( $(
> > 		tpc="${T}/.pc"
> > 		find "${D}" -name '*.pc' -type f | \
> > 		while read pc ; do
> > 			sed -e '/^Requires:/d' "${pc}" > "${tpc}"
> > 			$(tc-getPKG_CONFIG) --libs "${tpc}"
> > 		done | tr ' ' '\n' | sort -u | \
> > 		sed -n '/^-l/{s:^-l:lib:;s:$:.la:;p}'
> > 		rm -f "${tpc}"
> > 	) )
> 
> Could you remind me, please, what performance-critical use of this
> function does justify making it so harsh?

looks perfectly fine to me, and it has the bonus of working

> > > +			rm -f "${archivefile}" || die
> > 
> > `rm -f` almost never fails.  in the edge cases where it does, you've
> > got bigger problems.
> 
> And that problem is good enough to die here.

more like the system at large is going to be falling over independently
-mike
Attachment:
signature.asc (This is a digitally signed message part.)
Replies:
Re: [PATCH eutils] Move remove_libtool_files() from autotools-utils for wider use.
-- Michał Górny
References:
[PATCH eutils] Move remove_libtool_files() from autotools-utils for wider use.
-- Michał Górny
Re: [PATCH eutils] Move remove_libtool_files() from autotools-utils for wider use.
-- Mike Frysinger
Re: [PATCH eutils] Move remove_libtool_files() from autotools-utils for wider use.
-- Michał Górny
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Re: [PATCH eutils] Move remove_libtool_files() from autotools-utils for wider use.
Next by thread:
Re: [PATCH eutils] Move remove_libtool_files() from autotools-utils for wider use.
Previous by date:
Re: [PATCH eutils] Move remove_libtool_files() from autotools-utils for wider use.
Next by date:
Re: [PATCH eutils] Move remove_libtool_files() from autotools-utils for wider use.


Updated Jun 29, 2012

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-dev mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Contact us.