From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2014 14:30:44 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 00 of 15] packages: rename FOO_BAR_OPT into FOO_BAR_OPTS In-Reply-To: References: <20141004190749.2a9c9e31@free-electrons.com> <20141005091735.GD4220@free.fr> <20141005130744.15148459@free-electrons.com> Message-ID: <20141005143044.1e517832@free-electrons.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Dear Thomas De Schampheleire, On Sun, 5 Oct 2014 14:22:12 +0200, Thomas De Schampheleire wrote: > The reason these patches were part of the _OPT series was that due to > the introduction of an extra letter, some alignment was broken. If we > do not removal all alignment consistently, then how do you propose to > handle this? > > a. do nothing, and thus let the alignment be broken > b. expect the submitter of such renaming changes to fix the specific > alignment issues he/she introduced? (which is painful (but not > impossible) since the renaming typically happens with an automated > command or script) > c. remove all fragile alignment in one go, so that such problems do not occur. > > In my original patches I went for reasoning c. > How would you handle the alignment issue instead? Good question. For now, I'm tempted to say (a) :-) Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com