Hi Sebastien, Please read:
https://community.apache.org/contributors/etiquette BTW, the new building system is strange, but more clean. I think it should at least give some users feedback, like a text progress bar, etc. For course it needs improvement, but you don't need to do this way. BR, Alan On 3/7/23, Sebastien Lorquet <sebast...@lorquet.fr> wrote: > What is this? > > NuttX is broken. > > I ran make distclean, used the same defconfig, and I get this: > > > CC: string/lib_strsignal.c string/lib_strsignal.c: In function > 'strsignal': > string/lib_strsignal.c:169:7: error: duplicate case value > 169 | case SIGWORK: > | ^~~~ > string/lib_strsignal.c:117:7: note: previously used here > 117 | case SIGCHLD: > | ^~~~ > make[1]: *** [Makefile:134: bin//lib_strsignal.o] Error 1 > make: *** [tools/LibTargets.mk:180: libs/libc/libc.a] Error 2 > > Please stop the commit race and stop breaking nuttx > > > While having a look at this file I just found this: > > /* We don't know what signals names will be assigned to which signals in > * advance and we do not want to return a volatile value. One solution is > * this silly array of useless names: > */ > > static FAR const char *g_default_sigstr[32] = > { > "Signal 0", > "Signal 1", > "Signal 2", > "Signal 3", > "Signal 4", > "Signal 5", > "Signal 6", > "Signal 7", > "Signal 8", > "Signal 9", > "Signal 10", > "Signal 11", > "Signal 12", > "Signal 13", > "Signal 14", > "Signal 15", > "Signal 16", > "Signal 17", > "Signal 18", > "Signal 19", > "Signal 20", > "Signal 21", > "Signal 22", > "Signal 23", > "Signal 24", > "Signal 25", > "Signal 26", > "Signal 27", > "Signal 28", > "Signal 29", > "Signal 30", > "Signal 31", > }; > > What the actual FUCK, and I mean it, is THIS? > > What does this comment mean? Who is WE? > > Who has gigabytes of flash to waste to such garbage? > > Who has accepted that commit? > > Is anyone aware of the sprintf function? > > Sebastien > >
