Peter Memishian wrote:
>
> > For now ksh93 is not lint clean (it may become "lint" clean with minor
> > exceptions (silenced via "-erroff=") in the future - if you follow the
> > evolution of ksh93s- to ksh93s+ you'll notice that _lots_ of cleanup
> > work (e.g. compiler warnings, lint warnings, issues reported by Rational
> > Purify and "dbx -check access", Klockwork.com did us a favour and ran
> > their tools over the sources and reported the results back to
> > David&&Glenn etc.) has been done, not only for ksh93 but for the whole
> > AST codebase (which rivals OS/Net in size)), therefore I followed the
> > "perl" example.
> >
> > I've did a quick search through my mightly email archive... AFAIK the
> > original reason for doing it was to avoid that people do a "make lint ;
> > hit errors and then randomly start patching the sources at the next code
> > cleanup party" ...
>
> If your goal is to prevent anyone from fixing lint problems in there until
> we pull in new upstream changes that have them, then I'm OK with that. It
> would be good to comment that accordingly.
What about the following text:
-- snip --
#
# libdll is not lint-clean yet. Fake up a target.
#
# Use $ make lintcheck # to run lint manually (and please send all lint
# fixes to upstream (AT&T), the next update will then pull them into
# OS/Net).
#
lint:
@ print "usr/src/lib/libdll is not lint-clean: skipping"
@ $(TRUE)
-- snip --
It coveres the "send patches to upstream" item and instructs people how
they can run "lint" manually...
Better ?
----
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
