"Roger A. Faulkner" wrote: > > > So the next time we have a lint party (we used to do them every > > > couple of years), we can easily identify the lint-dirty sources. > > > > What if the sources are externally maintained (e.g. "perl", "ksh93") ? > > Is there a procedure to say "... provide lint fixes to upstream..." ? > > Well, we just punt on perl with this in the Makefile > (since no one at Sun will ever attempt to sanitize it): > > # Perl is not lint-clean. Fake up a target. > lint: > @ $(ECHO) "usr/src/cmd/perl is not lint-clean: skipping" > @ $(TRUE) > > As for ksh93, we'd have to invent the procedure. > I certainly hope that making the code lint-clean would be viewed > favorably by the community
See http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/ksh93-integration-discuss/2007-June/002640.html - most of the compiler warnings and similar stuff have already been slaughtered. > and that pushing such changes upstream > would be straightforward. That worked perfectly in the whole last year. We've updated the ksh93-integration prototype tree incrementally for each alpha/beta/final version between ksh93r up to ksh93s+_beta and patches were accepted by upstream without any problems. > Ditto for bug fixes (or have you fixed > the last bug in ksh93? :-) Grumpf... no... do you want to see my list of "major" items still open in ast-ksh.2007-04-18 (which is the basis for this putback (disclaimer: None of these bugs are "critical" and ksh93 passes the testsuite and it capable of replacing /usr/bin/ksh in it's current version without problems, too)) ? There is still _lots_ of work which needs to be done... ;-( ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) [EMAIL PROTECTED] \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;) _______________________________________________ opensolaris-code mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/opensolaris-code
