On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 01:23:30AM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote: > On Thu, 2005-09-08 at 13:26 +0900, Horms wrote: > > Hi Andres, > > > > In the course of using split-config I have noticed a small problem. In > > some cases it is not safe to remove an option from a config, unless it > > is removed gloablly. When I say not safe, nothing particularly > > catastropic happens, but each time you run split-config, you have to > > wade through a mountain of "this option was removed, what shall i do", > > messages. To demonstrate this, try split-config on arm/rpc, twice. > > Do you mean *removed* or *disabled*? If you mean removed; I changed > split-config to ignore removals, it should be in svn (unless I only > committed it to a local bzr repo, or it got lost in the shuffle..). If > you mean disabled; I haven't seen that problem yet. If it is the case, > I'll take a look.
I ment removed. I think I have the latest version, from dists/trunk/scripts, and it had the problem that I described. > > The patch below should aleviate this problem, by adding an annotation > > to the debian configs if a option has been removed, but is not > > removed globablly. > > Cool; feel free to commit if you think it's suitable, the worst that can > happen is I revert it if it's broken. Ok, will do. > > Its my first peek into the world or ruby, so please forgive any > > stupidity on my part. > > This brings up something I've been meaning to bring up. Right now, > we've got a mix of python, ruby, shell, and perl in svn. I'd like to > standardize on a language. Naturally, we'll still need to have things > that end up being run on the user's system in perl or shell (shell for > things that can't use or are too simplistic perl, and perl for other > things). However, for our standard tools to manage various things > (configs, control files, etc), we should choose either ruby or python. > I don't want to see perl used, since I don't think perl is suitable for > large scripts, and is difficult to maintain. I'm comfortable with > either ruby or python; I suppose it depends on what others are more > comfortable with. If necessary, I can rewrite split-config in python; > I've already started toying around w/ python scripts (see > scripts/testconfigs). > > Preferences? Once we have a common language, we can have a common > library as well (ages ago, I wrote half a Kconfig parser in racc; that > seems like it'd be useful for all kinds of scripts, but I'm not going to > spend any more time on it until we decide whether I should continue in > racc, or use something python-y). I don't know ruby or python, and I do know both perl or shell. I don't mind if we use ruby or python, but I don't have a prefereance for either. -- Horms -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
