svn commit: r314657 - in head/kerberos5: . lib/libgssapi_krb5 lib/libgssapi_ntlm lib/libgssapi_spnego lib/libhdb lib/libkafs5 lib/libkrb5 libexec/hprop libexec/kpasswdd tools/asn1_compile tools/slc

[Warner Losh]

On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 3:32 PM, Rodney W. Grimes
<freebsd at pdx.rh.cn85.dnsmgr.net> wrote:
>>
>> > On Mar 4, 2017, at 13:43, Warner Losh <imp at bsdimp.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 1:25 PM, Bryan Drewery <bdrewery at freebsd.org> wrote:
>> >>> On 3/4/2017 12:20 PM, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
>> >>> -- Start of PGP signed section.
>> >>> [ Charset windows-1252 unsupported, converting... ]
>> >>>>> On 3/4/2017 7:34 AM, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
>> >>>>> What is ${.CURDIR:H:H} ?????  Yes that seems to work but now we are obscuring
>> >>>>> ../.. into makefile syntax magic, probably not a grand idea.
>> >>>> It just trims off the last directory component.  This both reduces
>> >>>> namecache lookups, lessens the amount of data in a log, and makes
>> >>>> debugging a log simpler by not having a crazy path like:
>> >>>> /home/bdrewery/big/git/buildserver/sys/modules/usb/template/../../../dev/usb/template/usb_template.c
>> >>>>
>> >>>> It's far simpler to understand and work with:
>> >>>> /home/bdrewery/big/git/buildserver/sys/dev/usb/template/usb_template.c
>> >>>>
>> >>>> The only downside is it is slightly more obscure in a Makefile, but once
>> >>>> you know what :H is then it's not a problem.  This is why SRCTOP is even
>> >>>> better than this as it is far more clear than even :H and avoids the
>> >>>> ../../ problems.
>> >>> Lets do one or the other, but not both ${SRCTOP} and :H:H:H.  It appears
>> >>> that we now have a mix and mashed up some one way others the other.
>> >>
>> >> That I can agree with. I would prefer to standardize on SRCTOP as :H is
>> >> too obscure without learning about make details.
>> >
>> > :H is insane in 90% of the cases I've seen it used. Let's roll with
>> > SRCTOP everywhere we can. That's safer from directory motion anyway...
>>
>> Ok, I have 3 votes for SRCTOP, so I'll implement the remaining change using SRCTOP (for usr.bin), and reimplement the previous changes using SRCTOP.
>
> And that some how over rides the 3 votes for not doing any of these changes?
> Slow down please.  We dont need a bike shed, but I think we need a clear
> target and a consense larger than 3+ 3- and less than a 6 hour wall clock
> of discussion.
>
> It would also be best if it was this change and only this change committed
> in very large (preferably about 20) commits.

We've had about 200-300 commits in the build system in the past year.
There's no real need to slow down. It's a real mess (though a lot less
of one thanks to Bryan) and SRCTOP is a definite cleanup.

Warner