Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-11 Thread Junio C Hamano
Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com writes: - There may be pieces of usefully reusable code buried in builtin/*.o; - By definition, any code (piece of data or function definition) in builtin/*.o cannot be used in standalone binaries, because all of builtin/*.o expect to

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-11 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:33 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote: Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com writes: - There may be pieces of usefully reusable code buried in builtin/*.o; - By definition, any code (piece of data or function definition) in builtin/*.o cannot

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-11 Thread Junio C Hamano
Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com writes: What are the examples you have in mind, code that we want to forbid standalone from using? init_copy_notes_for_rewrite(). Nothing outside the 'git' binary would need that. If you disagree, show me an example. Nothing would need that, if

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-11 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote: Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com writes: What are the examples you have in mind, code that we want to forbid standalone from using? init_copy_notes_for_rewrite(). Nothing outside the 'git' binary would need

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-11 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote: Moreover, if you are going to argue that we shouldn't be closing the door [...] Felipe, you saying if you are going to argue ... to anybody else is kind of ironic. Why is it every thread I see you in, you're

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-11 Thread Junio C Hamano
Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com writes: Moreover, if you are going to argue that we shouldn't be closing the door, then why not link ./builtin/*.o to libgit.a? Huh? It does not make any sense. builtin/*.o files have cmd_foo() that are expected to be called from git.c::main(), but

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-11 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:17 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote: Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com writes: Moreover, if you are going to argue that we shouldn't be closing the door, then why not link ./builtin/*.o to libgit.a? Huh? It does not make any sense. builtin/*.o

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-11 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote: On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote: Moreover, if you are going to argue that we shouldn't be closing the door [...] Felipe, you saying if you are going to

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-11 Thread Junio C Hamano
Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com writes: On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:17 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote: Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com writes: Moreover, if you are going to argue that we shouldn't be closing the door, then why not link ./builtin/*.o to

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-11 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote: Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com writes: On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:17 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote: Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com writes: Moreover, if you are going to argue that

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-11 Thread Junio C Hamano
Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org writes: This whole thread has been one long argument about totally pointless things that wouldn't improve anything one way or the other. It's bikeshedding of the worst kind. Just let it go. The proposal to move sequencer.c to builtins/sequencer.c

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-11 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 2:59 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote: Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org writes: This whole thread has been one long argument about totally pointless things that wouldn't improve anything one way or the other. It's bikeshedding of the worst kind.

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-10 Thread Jeff King
On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 07:30:31PM +0200, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: I think that libgit.a should contain all code to be able to carry out all functions of git. The stuff in builtin/ is just a command-line user interface. Whether or not sequencer should be in builtin depends on whether the

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-10 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Jeff King p...@peff.net wrote: That is what libgit.a _is_ now. I do not mean to imply any additional judgement on what it could be. But if the goal is to make libgit.a functions that programs outside git.git would want, and nothing else, we may want to

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-10 Thread Jeff King
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 04:52:57PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Jeff King p...@peff.net wrote: That is what libgit.a _is_ now. I do not mean to imply any additional judgement on what it could be. But if the goal is to make libgit.a functions that

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-10 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 5:06 PM, Jeff King p...@peff.net wrote: On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 04:52:57PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Jeff King p...@peff.net wrote: That is what libgit.a _is_ now. I do not mean to imply any additional judgement on what it

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-10 Thread Junio C Hamano
Jeff King p...@peff.net writes: My general impression of the goal of our current code organization is: 1. builtin/*.c should each contain a single builtin command and its supporting static functions. Each file gets linked into git.o to make the main git executable. Correct; that

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-10 Thread Junio C Hamano
Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: Jeff King p...@peff.net writes: My general impression of the goal of our current code organization is: 1. builtin/*.c should each contain a single builtin command and its supporting static functions. Each file gets linked into git.o to

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-10 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 6:41 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote: For the particular case of trying to make sequencer.o, which does not currently have dependencies on builtin/*.o, depend on something that is in builtin/notes.o, the link phase of standalone that wants anything from

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-10 Thread Junio C Hamano
Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com writes: *1* ... which is a very reasonable thing to do. But moving sequencer.o to builtin/sequencer.o is *not* the way to do this. By now we all know what is the *CURRENT* way to do this; in other words, the status quo, which is BTW all messed

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-10 Thread Junio C Hamano
Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: And I do not see the reason why builtin/*.o should not depend on each other. It is not messed up at all. They are meant to be linked into a single binary---that is what being built-in is. A good way forward, the way it *SHOULD* be, is to slim the

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-10 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 7:04 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote: Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com writes: *1* ... which is a very reasonable thing to do. But moving sequencer.o to builtin/sequencer.o is *not* the way to do this. By now we all know what is the

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-10 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:53 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote: Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: And I do not see the reason why builtin/*.o should not depend on each other. It is not messed up at all. They are meant to be linked into a single binary---that is what being

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-09 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
Felipe Contreras wrote: The plan is simple; make libgit.a a proper library, starting by clarifying what goes into libgit.a, and what doesn't. If there's any hopes of ever having a public library, it's clear what code doesn't belong in libgit.a; code that is meant for builtins, that code

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-09 Thread John Keeping
On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 08:26:32PM +0530, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: Felipe Contreras wrote: The plan is simple; make libgit.a a proper library, starting by clarifying what goes into libgit.a, and what doesn't. If there's any hopes of ever having a public library, it's clear what code

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-09 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 10:12 AM, John Keeping j...@keeping.me.uk wrote: On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 08:26:32PM +0530, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: Felipe Contreras wrote: The plan is simple; make libgit.a a proper library, starting by clarifying what goes into libgit.a, and what doesn't. If

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-09 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Ramkumar Ramachandra artag...@gmail.com wrote: Felipe Contreras wrote: The plan is simple; make libgit.a a proper library, starting by clarifying what goes into libgit.a, and what doesn't. If there's any hopes of ever having a public library, it's clear what

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-09 Thread John Keeping
On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 10:40:32AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 10:12 AM, John Keeping j...@keeping.me.uk wrote: On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 08:26:32PM +0530, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: Felipe Contreras wrote: The plan is simple; make libgit.a a proper library,

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-09 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 11:02 AM, John Keeping j...@keeping.me.uk wrote: On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 10:40:32AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 10:12 AM, John Keeping j...@keeping.me.uk wrote: On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 08:26:32PM +0530, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: Felipe

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-09 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
John Keeping wrote: How is it only useful for builtin commands? By that logic everything belongs in builtin/ because it's all only used by builtin commands (I realise that is what you're arguing towards). sequencer.c is merely a common API for builtins to invoke continuations: i.e. stop the

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-09 Thread John Keeping
On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 11:22:06AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 11:02 AM, John Keeping j...@keeping.me.uk wrote: But we make a distinction between things that are specific to one command (especially argument parsing and user interaction) and more generally useful

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-09 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 12:03 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra artag...@gmail.com wrote: John Keeping wrote: Calling across from one builtin/*.c file to another is just as wrong as calling into a builtin/*.c file from a top-level file but the build system happens not to enforce the former. So

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-09 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: So libgit.a is a collection of everything that is shared between builtins? That is not to say that we shouldn't share things between builtins. We can do it in builtin/lib.a, as Felipe has demonstrated here [1]. [1]:

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-09 Thread Vincent van Ravesteijn
Op 9-6-2013 17:40, Felipe Contreras schreef: On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 10:12 AM, John Keeping j...@keeping.me.uk wrote: On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 08:26:32PM +0530, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: Felipe Contreras wrote: The plan is simple; make libgit.a a proper library, starting by clarifying what

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-09 Thread John Keeping
On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 12:13:41PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 12:03 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra artag...@gmail.com wrote: John Keeping wrote: Calling across from one builtin/*.c file to another is just as wrong as calling into a builtin/*.c file from a top-level

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-09 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Vincent van Ravesteijn v...@lyx.org wrote: Op 9-6-2013 17:40, Felipe Contreras schreef: On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 10:12 AM, John Keeping j...@keeping.me.uk wrote: On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 08:26:32PM +0530, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: Felipe Contreras wrote:

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-09 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 12:32 PM, John Keeping j...@keeping.me.uk wrote: On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 12:13:41PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 12:03 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra artag...@gmail.com wrote: John Keeping wrote: Calling across from one builtin/*.c file to another

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-08 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
Felipe Contreras wrote: There's no libgit, and there will never be, every object file in Git is the same, and there's wish to organize them in any way; they are *all* for the 'git' binary and its builtin commands. Nice joke patch to illustrate your point ;) On a more serious note, please be a

Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

2013-06-08 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 1:02 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra artag...@gmail.com wrote: Felipe Contreras wrote: There's no libgit, and there will never be, every object file in Git is the same, and there's wish to organize them in any way; they are *all* for the 'git' binary and its builtin commands.