svn commit: trunk/busybox: coreutils coreutils/libcoreutils include etc...

[Manuel Novoa III]

Hi Rob,

Just got back...

On Fri, Sep 09, 2005 at 10:58:39PM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> On Thursday 08 September 2005 23:19, Manuel Novoa III wrote:
> > Hi Rob,
> >
> > > But moving the assignments from the end of the loop to the beginning did
> > > indeed make the warnings go away.  Yeah, in part it's because our
> > > compiler is stupid, but once you get up to a dozen or so warnings real
> > > bugs start getting lost in the shuffle.  Easiest to just not to have
> > > any...
> >
> > Not a big deal.  I just like to maintain my own code, since I do use it.
> 
> I changed the variable names (and whitespace) as a separate checkin.  The 
> variable names weren't english and didn't describe what the variables were 
> used for.  They might as well have been register names.

s = start... e = end.  If it's my code and I'm supporting it, it makes 
it easier for me to have it in my coding style with my conventions.

> > I'm flying out Friday morning to Houston for a wedding and to see my
> > grandparents.  Their house in New Orleans is flooded and they're
> > currently staying with my cousin's in-laws.
> 
> My aunt barbara and grandmother on that side got flooded out of Louisiana as 
> well.  (Portland, I think.)  Barbara's currently in dallas (where her company 
> moved its offices).  Her husband was back to their house today, and although 
> it has significant water damage it wasn't looted and its electricity has been 
> restored, so it's not a total loss.  Not sure whether or not they're moving 
> back or trying to sell it.
> 
> My grandmother's moving to Oregon.

Good luck to them.  My grandparents seem to be ok, but are kind of in
limbo.  Looks like my brother will be moving to Huntsville, AL though.

> > I can certainly get that warning removed some time early next week
> > though.
> 
> If you want to reorganize the code without reintroducing the warning, by all 
> means.  I thought you'd wandered over to uClibc land more or less 
> exclusively.  If I'd known you were still active, I'd certainly have bounced 
> the patch off of you.

Not really active in a devel role at the moment, although I did redo
nice and did renice recently.  But I will certainly maintain the code
I wrote and will fix any bugs sent to me.

> I do, however, think that the knee-jerk reversion of all changes 
> (reintroducing the warning, making the code bigger on intel, putting back in 
> the GPL boiler plate that after discussion on the list we've decided to 
> remove in all the busybox apps, and turning "oldline, oldskipped, line, and 
> skipped" back into the obviously much more intelligible "so, eo, s1, e1")...
> 
> Can you honestly say this checkin is an improvement, or just marking 
> territory?  (If the latter, please put a big warning at the top of the file 
> that nobody else is ever to check any changes into this file.)

As I wrote you the other day, your changes were same size or larger for
the two platforms I tested.  What compiler are you using and for what arch?

Rest assured that I'm not going to revert something that it measurably
smaller unless it is broken or adds bugs.  Remember that I use busybox
too and I'm definitely all for code as small as possible.

Manuel