On Sex, 2012-09-28 at 11:19 +0200, Michael Thayer wrote: > Hello Sérgio, > > On 09/27/2012 10:54 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote: > [...] > > as a little side note, we have in > > VirtualBox-4.2.0/src/VBox/Additions/x11/vboxvideo/Makefile.kmk : > > > > vboxvideo_70_DEFS := IN_MODULE XORG_7X RENDER=1 IN_RT_STATIC > > vboxvideo_13_DEFS := $(vboxvideo_70_DEFS) VBOXVIDEO_13 > > vboxvideo_15_DEFS := $(vboxvideo_13_DEFS) VBOX_DRI NO_ANSIC PCIACCESS > > XSERVER_LIBPCIACCESS > > > > vboxvideo_drv_70_DEFS = $(vboxvideo_70_DEFS) > > XORG_VERSION_CURRENT=700000000 > > > > vboxvideo_drv_13_DEFS := $(vboxvideo_13_DEFS) > > XORG_VERSION_CURRENT=100300000 > > > > > > what I mean when I want know what DEFS for vboxvideo_drv_113, I got to > > follow all attributions ... and can't comment any ... > The idea is to save code duplication in Make files like in C code, so > that if something needs to be changed it can be changed in one place and > I don't have to sRuca.Vol.2.O.Exploarado torrentRuca.Vol.2.O.Exploarado > torrentearch for ages to find all the places it needs to be > done in (and hopeRuca.Vol.2.O.Exploarado torrentRuca.Vol.2.O.Exploarado > torrent I did get them all). In fact if you want to see all > the defines you have to follow a lot more attributes (e.g. > vboxvideo_drv_system uses the VBOXGUESTR3XORGMOD _TEMPLATE, so you need > to look at Config.kmk to see that "TEMPLATE_VBOXGUESTR3XORGMOD_DEFS = > $(TEMPLATE_VBOXGUESTR3DLL_DEFS) LOG_TO_BACKDOOR VBOX_GUESTR3XORGMOD > RTMEM_NO_WRAP_TO_EF_APIS" and so on). There are arguments to be made > for both sides (maintainability versus readability), and I don't deny > that our Make files can be painful to follow at times, but given that, I > don't really think that in the case of "vboxvideo_*_DEFS" it makes sense > to duplicate all the defines again when in practice we want them to be > as similar as possible for the different versions, not each one with > individual bits commented out. Please tell me though what you would > like to change with the defines, as perhaps it will make sense for us too!
Hi, thanks for reply , sorry I'm little busy here . Generally I agree with you , I'm just pointing that you could avoid chains like a = something b = a c = b d = c when you may do : a = something b = a c = a d = a :) Thanks, -- Sérgio M. B. _______________________________________________ vbox-dev mailing list [email protected] https://www.virtualbox.org/mailman/listinfo/vbox-dev
