On Thu, Feb 02, 2023 at 12:29:32PM +0100, tlaro...@polynum.com wrote: > edk2setup.sh has shortcomings. To list some: > > - The functions return a status but it is not tested; hence the > script goes to the end with a final "return $?" that simply > returns the status of the last command that is "unset" which > always successfully unsets, even a not set variable. Hence a > script can not catch a failure by testing the end status that is > always 0; > - If WORKSPACE is set, --reconfig does nothing; > - If EDK_TOOLS_PATH and PACKAGES_PATH are set, even to incorrect > values, the script succeeds even if BaseTools/ is not found > anywhere; > - The comments are obsolete (1): bash(1) is required because the syntax > is not POSIX.2 sh(1) compliant and because some Makefile recipes > have "bash'isms" (indeed, a GMAKE variable should be exported > with a definition of "/path/to/gnu/make SHELL=/path/to/bash" and > a canonical call should be "$GMAKE ..."); > - The comments are obsolete (2): CYGWIN is not treated in anyway > specifically and, on the contrary, the regexp translation of ':' > in spaces for PACKAGES_PATH would be sure to create a mess with > a MS Windows like path; > - The settings have obviously evolved and the help message does not > list all the variables that can be set and that do modify the > way the setting is done; > - Some commands (notably whereis(1)) are not standard utilities, not > to be found on all Unix like systems and, even if found, have > greatly diverging behaviors. > > What is the preferred procedure?
Ignore it and to just use BaseTools/BuildEnv directly? I'm not fully sure what value it adds ... > Should I file BZ to list all the > problems so that someone authorized may address them? Or can I propose > a patch to address these (keeping it backward compatible with a present > correct use) with a reasonable hope that, as an exception that will not > become a rule, it will not be ignored? Sending patches has a much higher chance to succeed, although there is no guarantee unfortunately. I'd start with removing code: The python handling it adds should be obsolete, python2 is EOL and I think meanwhile the python tools require python3 anyway. So all that can probably replaced with "export PYTHON_COMMAND=python3". Leaves less code which needs actual fixing ;) take care, Gerd -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#99490): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/99490 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/96697952/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
