From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: George Dunlap Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] make: Normalize config options for external trees Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 11:46:34 +0100 Message-ID: <53CCEF8A.4080001@eu.citrix.com> References: <1405354526-20929-1-git-send-email-george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com> <1405354526-20929-2-git-send-email-george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com> <20140721102235.GA8522@aepfle.de> <53CCEB32.80208@eu.citrix.com> <20140721104444.GA10803@aepfle.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20140721104444.GA10803@aepfle.de> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Olaf Hering Cc: Ian Jackson , Ian Campbell , xen-devel@lists.xen.org List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 07/21/2014 11:44 AM, Olaf Hering wrote: > On Mon, Jul 21, George Dunlap wrote: > >> On 07/21/2014 11:22 AM, Olaf Hering wrote: >>> On Mon, Jul 14, George Dunlap wrote: >>> >>>> - CONFIG_QEMU (=> QEMU_TRADITIONAL_LOC) >>>> - QEMU_REMOTE (=> QEMU_TRADITIONAL_URL) >>>> - QEMU_TAG (=> QEMU_TRADITIONAL_REVISION) >>>> - SEABIOS_UPSTREAM_TAG (=> SEABIOS_UPSTREAM_REVISION) >>> This broke my script, which I fixed just now. >> How did it break your script? The intent was that it would be >> backwards-compatible enough not to break anyone's scripts... > To export the tree(s) I have to parse the given revisions. I changed my > script like that (skip first QEMU_TRADITIONAL_REVISION): > > --- xen-unstable-export.sh (revision 1090) > +++ xen-unstable-export.sh (revision 1091) > @@ -116,9 +116,9 @@ > then > exit 1 > fi > -qemu_xen_traditional_tag=`sed -n '/^QEMU_TAG/{s@^.* @@;p;q}' Config.mk` > +qemu_xen_traditional_tag=` sed -n '/^QEMU_TRADITIONAL_REVISION/{/QEMU_TAG/d;s@^.* @@;p;q}' Config.mk ` > qemu_xen_upstream_tag=`sed -n '/^QEMU_UPSTREAM_REVISION/{s@^.* @@;p;q}' Config.mk` > > > I was thinking of a parsable 'make showrevisions' target, but I think thats > overdoing things. Oh, right -- yeah, I was focusing more on *specifying* the value, rather than *reporting* the value. I don't see how I could work around someone reading the config code itself, at least off the top of my head. -George