On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
> Hi Jim,
>
> On Oct 29, 2013, at 12:01 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> I have just pushed a signed v0.1 tag. It holds no particular meaning.
>>
>> I find that smaller commit-count numbers are more reader-friendly
>> than the 8000+ numbers we ha
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 4:30 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 10/28/2013 05:10 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
>>
>> * gnulib-tool: Some "cd" built-in functions print a directory name
>> to stdout when CDPATH is set, e.g.,
>
> More precisely, _all_ posix-conforming cd implementations are required
> to write to
On 10/28/2013 05:10 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
>
> * gnulib-tool: Some "cd" built-in functions print a directory name
> to stdout when CDPATH is set, e.g.,
More precisely, _all_ posix-conforming cd implementations are required
to write to stdout if CDPATH had an effect. It's more than just "some".
Hi Jim,
On Oct 29, 2013, at 12:01 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
> I have just pushed a signed v0.1 tag. It holds no particular meaning.
>
> I find that smaller commit-count numbers are more reader-friendly
> than the 8000+ numbers we had reached relative to the v0.0 patch.
>
> Thus, for the next 999
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 8:45 AM, Bruce Korb wrote:
> On 10/27/13 17:46, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>>>
>>> gnulib_dir ?= $(srcdir)/gnulib
>>> -gnulib-version = $$(cd $(gnulib_dir) && git describe)
>>> +gnulib-version = $$(cd $(gnulib_dir) && git rev-parse --short HEAD)
>>> bootstrap-tools ?= autocon
Hi Jim,
On Oct 29, 2013, at 11:54 AM, Jim Meyering wrote:
> I will soon push the following change, followed by another that will add
> this line
>
> (unset CDPATH) >/dev/null 2>&1 && unset CDPATH
>
> near the top of gnulib-tool. That CDPATH-unsetting change is the accepted
> approach to rend
I have just pushed a signed v0.1 tag. It holds no particular meaning.
I find that smaller commit-count numbers are more reader-friendly
than the 8000+ numbers we had reached relative to the v0.0 patch.
Thus, for the next 999 commits, git describe will print something like this:
v0.1-NNN-g
I will soon push the following change, followed by another that will add
this line
(unset CDPATH) >/dev/null 2>&1 && unset CDPATH
near the top of gnulib-tool. That CDPATH-unsetting change is the accepted
approach to rendering "cd" sensible, i.e., making it emit nothing
to stdout. Thus, there
On 10/28/2013 02:35 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
> Given the Comments in vfprintf-posix:
>> Comment:
>> This module should not be used as a dependency from a test module,
>> otherwise when this module occurs as a tests-related module, it will
>> have side effects on the compilation of the 'vasnprintf' mo
Hi Bruce,
On Oct 29, 2013, at 4:45 AM, Bruce Korb wrote:
> On 10/27/13 17:46, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>>> gnulib_dir ?= $(srcdir)/gnulib
>>> -gnulib-version = $$(cd $(gnulib_dir) && git describe)
>>> +gnulib-version = $$(cd $(gnulib_dir) && git rev-parse --short HEAD)
>>> bootstrap-tools ?= autoc
On 10/28/2013 02:16 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 10/19/2013 09:03 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> With very recent gcc and all warnings enabled for grep's subset of
>> gnulib, I was seeing warnings about functions that deserve pure, const
>> and gnu_printf attributes.
>>
>
>> From 88e5b4d4641f294d8f824d7
On Oct 29, 2013, at 4:09 AM, Jim Meyering wrote:
> Hi Gary,
Hi Jim,
> I think your patch is based on an invalid premise:
> That somehow "git describe" is at fault.
> Actually, the diagnostic you reported suggests that your gnulib
> repository has no tag, which means your environment is the cause
On 10/19/2013 09:03 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
> With very recent gcc and all warnings enabled for grep's subset of
> gnulib, I was seeing warnings about functions that deserve pure, const
> and gnu_printf attributes.
>
> From 88e5b4d4641f294d8f824d770c9c55a1abe49768 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From:
On 10/27/13 17:46, Pádraig Brady wrote:
gnulib_dir ?= $(srcdir)/gnulib
-gnulib-version = $$(cd $(gnulib_dir) && git describe)
+gnulib-version = $$(cd $(gnulib_dir) && git rev-parse --short HEAD)
bootstrap-tools ?= autoconf,automake,gnulib
...
This would change the announce message from:
Hi Gary,
I think your patch is based on an invalid premise:
That somehow "git describe" is at fault.
Actually, the diagnostic you reported suggests that your gnulib
repository has no tag, which means your environment is the cause, not git.
A full clone of gnulib always has at least the v0.0 tag th
Hi Paul,
On Oct 27, 2013, at 5:17 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
> I don't have time to review the new function library entirely,
Oh, I wasn’t expecting a review at all, which is why I started by
submitting funclib.sh, a standalone module. Otherwise we’d just be
back to square one with the submissions
16 matches
Mail list logo
