Le Wed, 3 Aug 2011 08:26:05 +0200,
Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org> a écrit :
> On Mon, 01 Aug 2011, Michael Tautschnig wrote:
> > Indeed symbol ordering may vary, but also there is no reason for dpkg-gensymbols
> > to guarantee a particular ordering.
>
> Well, dpkg-gensymbols does sort the symbols files. Precisely so that
> diff are meaningful. Otherwise they would be useless.
>
> Code extract:
> foreach my $sym (sort { $a->get_symboltempl() cmp
> $b->get_symboltempl() } @symbols) {
>
> What this means is that the symbols files provided by the package is not
> properly sorted...
What do your mean exactly by sorted ?
sorted using the 'sort' program ?
sorted like the un-mangled symbols ?
> That said the generated diff should not always be applied as is. In many
> cases if you have used tags and patterns in your symbols files, adding a
> new symbol requires some "post-processing" to make it fit with the way the
> symbols file is managed.
Yes I understood, that this patch should not be applyied as it.
Maybe the patch should add MISSING and ADDED symbols.
then it would be the maintainer responsability to properly tag thoses new/missing symbols.
> For example deactivating a symbol on a specific architecture requires fiddling
> with an arch tag rather than removing the symbol...
It means also that if I use #include it is no more possible to use the patch
right ?
See you
Frederic
--
GPG public key 4096R/4696E015 2011-02-14
fingerprint = E92E 7E6E 9E9D A6B1 AA31 39DC 5632 906F 4696 E015
uid Picca Frédéric-Emmanuel <picca@synchrotron-soleil.fr>
GPG public key 1024D/A59B1171 2009-08-11
fingerprint = 1688 A3D6 F0BD E4DF 2E6B 06AA B6A9 BA6A A59B 1171
uid Picca Frédéric-Emmanuel <picca@debian.org>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature