This is the mail archive of the cygwin-apps mailing list for the Cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

RE: [GTG] Re: [ITA] indent 2.2.9 - C/C++ language source code formatting program

On 28 August 2007 18:52, Brian Dessent wrote:

> Dave Korn wrote:
>>> So the rule is that only top level libs (here libintl8) need
>>> to be mentioned in setup.hint::require?
>>   Absolutely so.  And you can omit cygwin itself!
> Actually no, there are cases where that will give you incorrect or
> misleading information.

  (But not the "you can omit cygwin itself" bit!)

> However, there should also be a "libb" at the first level of indention
> because app directly imports from libb as well -- but this line was
> suppressed by cygcheck because it had already printed information for
> libb.  Thus if you only go by what is at the first level of indentation,
> then you would conclude that app's setup.hint should list only liba,
> however app has a direct dependance on libb which you have failed to
> indicate.
> The practical implication of this may not be severe, because app's
> requiring of liba will also give it the libb that it needs.  However, I
> wouldn't play games with setup.hint dependencies like that.  

  Oh, yow.  Fair enough.  Didn't realise the output could be misleading like
that, I thought it was comprehensive and verbatim.

  JFTR, the commandline I posted was in no way supposed to be a recipe for
generating setup.hint lines, but merely a first-approximation answer to the
question "How many transitive dependencies are there in cygwin?"

> I don't
> think it's asking too much for the maintainer to know the direct list of
> dependencies of his package, which can usually be had simply by looking
> at the link command that created the binary.

  Well, nor do I, in general, but OTOH I don't see why we shouldn't provide tools
to do automatically what would otherwise have to be done manually.

  That is kind of the point of computers, is it not?

  So here's a proposal: make cygcheck *not* suppress duplicate libraries when -v
is given.  (Or perhaps only when more than one -v is given, if you'd prefer).

  Or hey, even add a new flag/option/switch to it that is specifically for the
purpose and that will actually output your requires: line for you, ready to cat
straight into setup.hint?

Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]