Re: [vdr] Makefile variable names LCLBLD and PLGCFG

2013-03-20 Thread Manuel Reimer

Carsten Koch wrote:

But if they really cannot have readable names,
at least I would not provide a default, but  let
the makefile issue a message that they must
be set (as I suggested in the other thread).


They don't have to be set, so why should the Makefile issue a message?

Yours

Manuel

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Makefile variable names LCLBLD and PLGCFG

2013-03-20 Thread Paul Menzel
Am Sonntag, den 17.03.2013, 18:06 +0100 schrieb Klaus Schmidinger:
 On 17.03.2013 18:00, Carsten Koch wrote:
  On 03/17/13 13:00, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
  On 17.03.2013 12:46, Ville Skyttä wrote:
  Hello,
 
  Should probably have spoken earlier, but is there any particular reason
  for the ugly and hard to read Makefile variable names LCLBLD and PLGCFG?
  I suppose they're short for LOCALBUILD and PLUGINCONFIG, but why do they
  have to be short for anything, it's not like we're running out of space
  for their names anywhere, is it? Besides, I don't think LCLBLD describes
  what its effects are very well, INPLACE would sounds better to me.
 
  The ship may already have sailed for plgcfg in vdr.pc as it's being used
  by many plugin Makefiles already, but I believe the attached patches
  should be safe for 2.0.0.
 
  I'm afraid it's too late for that.
 
  I do not understand why it should be too late.
  2.0 is not out yet.
 
 But we're in the final testing phase.
 Besides, Ville's patch also touched the Makefiles of plugins - and
 plugin authors and distribution managers react very intense when they
 have to modify their files ;-).

If I am not mistaken, Ville’s issue was that the names were not clear.
Could a comment be added to the Makefile what the meaning is then. That
should not break anything.

[…]


Thanks,

Paul


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Makefile variable names LCLBLD and PLGCFG

2013-03-20 Thread Klaus Schmidinger

On 20.03.2013 18:02, Paul Menzel wrote:

Am Sonntag, den 17.03.2013, 18:06 +0100 schrieb Klaus Schmidinger:

On 17.03.2013 18:00, Carsten Koch wrote:

On 03/17/13 13:00, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:

On 17.03.2013 12:46, Ville Skyttä wrote:

Hello,

Should probably have spoken earlier, but is there any particular reason
for the ugly and hard to read Makefile variable names LCLBLD and PLGCFG?
I suppose they're short for LOCALBUILD and PLUGINCONFIG, but why do they
have to be short for anything, it's not like we're running out of space
for their names anywhere, is it? Besides, I don't think LCLBLD describes
what its effects are very well, INPLACE would sounds better to me.

The ship may already have sailed for plgcfg in vdr.pc as it's being used
by many plugin Makefiles already, but I believe the attached patches
should be safe for 2.0.0.


I'm afraid it's too late for that.


I do not understand why it should be too late.
2.0 is not out yet.


But we're in the final testing phase.
Besides, Ville's patch also touched the Makefiles of plugins - and
plugin authors and distribution managers react very intense when they
have to modify their files ;-).


If I am not mistaken, Ville’s issue was that the names were not clear.
Could a comment be added to the Makefile what the meaning is then. That
should not break anything.


Something like this?

# Use 'make LCLBLD=1' to build locale and plugin files under the source 
directory:
ifdef LCLBLD
...

# Use this if you want to have a central place where you configure compile time
# parameters for plugins:
#PLGCFG = $(CONFDIR)/plugins.mk

Klaus

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Makefile variable names LCLBLD and PLGCFG

2013-03-17 Thread Klaus Schmidinger

On 17.03.2013 12:46, Ville Skyttä wrote:

Hello,

Should probably have spoken earlier, but is there any particular reason
for the ugly and hard to read Makefile variable names LCLBLD and PLGCFG?
I suppose they're short for LOCALBUILD and PLUGINCONFIG, but why do they
have to be short for anything, it's not like we're running out of space
for their names anywhere, is it? Besides, I don't think LCLBLD describes
what its effects are very well, INPLACE would sounds better to me.

The ship may already have sailed for plgcfg in vdr.pc as it's being used
by many plugin Makefiles already, but I believe the attached patches
should be safe for 2.0.0.


I'm afraid it's too late for that.

Sorry for the time you wasted - you should have asked first.

Klaus

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Makefile variable names LCLBLD and PLGCFG

2013-03-17 Thread Ville Skyttä
On 2013-03-17 14:00, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:

 I'm afraid it's too late for that.

HWLLBDCLLBTHVTRWY

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Makefile variable names LCLBLD and PLGCFG

2013-03-17 Thread Carsten Koch

On 03/17/13 13:00, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:

On 17.03.2013 12:46, Ville Skyttä wrote:

Hello,

Should probably have spoken earlier, but is there any particular reason
for the ugly and hard to read Makefile variable names LCLBLD and PLGCFG?
I suppose they're short for LOCALBUILD and PLUGINCONFIG, but why do they
have to be short for anything, it's not like we're running out of space
for their names anywhere, is it? Besides, I don't think LCLBLD describes
what its effects are very well, INPLACE would sounds better to me.

The ship may already have sailed for plgcfg in vdr.pc as it's being used
by many plugin Makefiles already, but I believe the attached patches
should be safe for 2.0.0.


I'm afraid it's too late for that.


I do not understand why it should be too late.
2.0 is not out yet.

But if they really cannot have readable names,
at least I would not provide a default, but  let
the makefile issue a message that they must
be set (as I suggested in the other thread).

Carsten.


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Makefile variable names LCLBLD and PLGCFG

2013-03-17 Thread Klaus Schmidinger

On 17.03.2013 18:00, Carsten Koch wrote:

On 03/17/13 13:00, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:

On 17.03.2013 12:46, Ville Skyttä wrote:

Hello,

Should probably have spoken earlier, but is there any particular reason
for the ugly and hard to read Makefile variable names LCLBLD and PLGCFG?
I suppose they're short for LOCALBUILD and PLUGINCONFIG, but why do they
have to be short for anything, it's not like we're running out of space
for their names anywhere, is it? Besides, I don't think LCLBLD describes
what its effects are very well, INPLACE would sounds better to me.

The ship may already have sailed for plgcfg in vdr.pc as it's being used
by many plugin Makefiles already, but I believe the attached patches
should be safe for 2.0.0.


I'm afraid it's too late for that.


I do not understand why it should be too late.
2.0 is not out yet.


But we're in the final testing phase.
Besides, Ville's patch also touched the Makefiles of plugins - and
plugin authors and distribution managers react very intense when they
have to modify their files ;-).


But if they really cannot have readable names,
at least I would not provide a default, but  let
the makefile issue a message that they must
be set (as I suggested in the other thread).


Sorry, no more changes for version 2.0.
Just bugfixes, if anything is really broken.

Klaus

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr