On Fri, Nov 02 2018, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> I think up to patch 4 here should be near a state that's ready for
> inclusion.
>
> Although I'm on the fence with the approach in 1/5. Should this be a
> giant getopt switch statement like that in a helper script? An
> alternative would be to write out a shell file similar to
> GIT-BUILD-OPTIONS and source that from this thing. I don't know, what
> do you all think?
>
> The idea with 4/5 was to make this symlink mode the default in
> config.mak.uname and have a blacklist of systems like Windows that
> couldn't deal with it.
>
> Since my ad874608d8 ("Makefile: optionally symlink libexec/git-core
> binaries to bin/git", 2018-03-13) I see that e.g. Debian and GitLab
> have started shipping with the INSTALL_SYMLINKS flag, so making that
> unconditional is the next logical step.
>
> The 5th one is more radical. See
> https://public-inbox.org/git/[email protected]/ from
> back in March for context.
>
> I'd like to say it's ready, but I've spotted some fallout:
>
> * Help like "git ninit" suggesting "git init" doesn't work, this is
> because load_command_list() in help.c doesn't look out our
> in-memory idea of builtins, it reads the libexecdir, so if we don't
> have the programs there it doesn't know about it.
A follow-up on this: We should really fix this for other
reasons. I.e. compile in some "this is stuff we ourselves think is in
git".
There's other manifestations of this, e.g.:
git-sizer --help # => shows you help
git sizer --help # => says it doesn't have a manpage
Because we aren't aware that git-sizer is some external tool, and that
we should route --help to it.
Non-withstanding the arguable bug that things like git-sizer shouldn't
be allowing themselves to be invoked by "git" like that without
guaranteeing that it can consume all the options 'git' expects. When I
had to deal with a similar problem in an external git-* command I was
maintaining I simply made it an error to invoke it as "git mything"
instead of "git-mything".
> * GIT_TEST_INSTALLED breaks entirely under this, as early as the
> heuristic for "are we built?" being "do we have git-init in
> libexecdir?". I tried a bit to make this work, but there's a lot of
> dependencies there.
>
> * We still (and this is also true of my ad874608d8) hardlink
> everything in the build dir via a different part of the Makefile,
> ideally we should do exactly the same thing there so also normal
> tests and not just GIT_TEST_INSTALLED (if that worked) would test
> in the same mode.
>
> I gave making that work a bit of a try and gave up in the Makefile
> jungle.
>
> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason (5):
> Makefile: move long inline shell loops in "install" into helper
> Makefile: conform some of the code to our coding standards
> Makefile: stop hiding failures during "install"
> Makefile: add NO_INSTALL_SYMLINKS_FALLBACK switch
> Makefile: Add a NO_INSTALL_BUILTIN_EXECDIR_ALIASES flag
>
> Makefile | 65 +++++++++++--------------
> install_programs | 124 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 151 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
> create mode 100755 install_programs
