"Bo Borgerson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 12:38 PM, Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Have you received/sent the paper yet? > > Yep, I sent it out this morning. > >> So how about adding an sc_*** rule for this in maint.mk? > > I added three so the failure message would reflect which of the > conventions appeared to have been violated.
Thanks! A few suggestions: ... > I had to add explicit exclusions for some false positives. There will > likely be some case in the future where the correct adjustment is to > the sc_*** rule rather than to the code it complained about. Please use VC_LIST_EXCEPT, so that the checks look only at version-controlled files. That also provides a method for exceptions: see the existing .x-sc_* files. > Subject: [PATCH] Standardize some error messages. Insert "* " on each of these ChangeLog-style lines in the commit log. This matters because of the way we generate the ChangeLog file from the commit logs. > maint.mk: Add automatic checks for non-standard error messages. include the names of the new targets in parentheses, e.g., * maint.mk (sc_error_message_warn_fatal, sc_error_message_uppercase): (sc_error_message_period): ... > src/cp.c: Standardize some error messages. > src/date.c: Likewise. > src/dircolors.c: Likewise. > src/du.c: Likewise. ... > tests/du/files0-from: Expect new error message. > tests/misc/wc-files0-from: Likwise. > tests/misc/xstrtol: Likwise. > lib/xmemxfrm.c: Likwise. s/Likwise/Likewise/ ;-) _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list Bug-coreutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
