[PATCH] misc size-shrinkage; merges

Rob Landley rob at landley.net
Tue Aug 29 21:09:30 UTC 2006


On Tuesday 29 August 2006 3:22 pm, Bernhard Fischer wrote:
> >The URL you gave is 404.
> 
> I saved that .config also to
> http://busybox.net/~aldot/bb/busybox.config.Breeze
> 
> Not sure why you think pointing out a bug insults you.

I start the day by reading a patch from you with a comment that implies I'm 
not doing my job.  Another patch from you broke building in my tree.  #2 in 
your list started with some kind of strange ultimatum ("I won't take this 
into my tree"), and #1 implies that the entire tree is unusable due to the 
vagueness of the bug report.

Contextually, it didn't improve my mood.

> I changed the type of n to avoid compiler warnings, also (IIRC, would
> have to look) i and n were used for two things, which created bigger
> code for gcc-4.0.

Ok.

> >little gem:
> >
> > int dd_main(int argc, char **argv)
> > {
> >+#define sync_flag      (1<<0)
> >+#define noerror                (1<<1)
> >+#define trunc_flag     (1<<2)
> >+#define twobufs_flag (1<<3)
> >+       int flags = trunc_flag;
> >
> >Yup, #define constants mixed in with variable declarations in a function 
> 
> As you can see, trunc_flag is used right there, so it's nice to see
> nearby what it is.

Could you move it right before the dd_main and make the macros all caps?

> >(Because the #define will respect the scope of the function, sure!  The 
> 
> You aren't being sarcastic, are you?

Actually, I was.

> >preprocessor knows all about that.)  And they're lower case to look like 
> >normal variables, because putting them in ALL_CAPS would give away the 
secret 
> >that they're preprocessor macros, and we wouldn't want to do that...
> 
> I just copy and pasted them from the original names. You wouldn't assign
> anything to them, or wouldn't be able to anyway.

The original names were variables that values got assigned to.  The new ones 
are constant masks applied to a bitfield.  You changed the role but carefully 
preserved the name.

> >I mostly hold my tongue about this sort of thing, but not when the person 
who 
> >commits this stuff starts insulting the job I'm doing.
> 
> Again, someone on IRC pointed out a bug, didn't want to subscribe to the
> list, and stated the fact that trunk doesn fail his example. That
> example did work before. No idea why you think that's a personal insult.

I'd like to know which commit broke it because tracking it down is likely to 
be fun otherwise.  (We're tickling something strange in glibc, which is 
always a bad sign.)

Rob
-- 
Never bet against the cheap plastic solution.



More information about the busybox mailing list