From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=52798 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OKVTv-0002aG-Eb
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 Jun 2010 07:54:36 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <armbru@redhat.com>) id 1OKVTu-0000Uq-7Y
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 Jun 2010 07:54:35 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:37074)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <armbru@redhat.com>) id 1OKVTu-0000Ue-10
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 Jun 2010 07:54:34 -0400
From: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 00/16] clean up vl.c code
References: <1275583692-11678-1-git-send-email-Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>
	<m3bpbr8az0.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> <4C08B80F.4040401@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2010 13:54:28 +0200
In-Reply-To: <4C08B80F.4040401@redhat.com> (Jes Sorensen's message of "Fri, 04
	Jun 2010 10:23:43 +0200")
Message-ID: <m3mxvb2etn.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com> writes:

> On 06/04/10 10:21, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com writes:
>>> I have tried to be as careful as I can to not break non Linux support,
>>> but as I only have a Linux build environment handy, I would appreciate
>>> it if people with other OSes could check that I didn't break anything
>>> for them. In particular I would like to know if win32 still builds.
>> 
>> I like moving stuff out of vl.c in general.  Your moves of entire
>> functions look like a win to me.  I have doubts about spreading the
>> option switch over three files, though.
>
> The problem is right now there are too many OS specific options, but
> having the #ifdefs plastered all over to enable/disable them accordingly
> is just a nightmare and is prone to leave in inconsistent behavior for
> various OSes. See the set_proc_name() stuff for an example.

I doubt spreading option code over separate files will help consistency.

I suspect the true root of the problem is having (too many) OS-specific
options in the first place.  What about parsing options the same
everywhere, calling out to OS-specific functions to do the actual work?
Let them fail with "can't do this on this OS".