Bug#666243: RFS: peg/0.1.9-1 [ITP] -- recursive-descent parser generators for C
On 19/07/2012 13:41, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Giulio Paci <giuliopaci@gmail.com>, 2012-07-19, 04:09:
>>> The examples directory could act as a test suite. Please run it at
>>> build time.
>> Done.
>
> Please honour DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=nocheck.
Fixed.
> That's better. You probably want to add a new line (escaped with a dot),
> between "it." and "Unlike". Otherwise, they'll be considered a single
> logical line.
Done.
> You can keep "=":
>
> ":=" assignments can't be overridden;
> "=" assignments can be overridden by "make VARIABLE=new-value".
> "?=" assignments can be overridden by environment variables or by "make
> VARIABLE=new-value".
Thank you very much: this is a very clear and useful explanation.
>>>> %.peg-c : %.peg compile.c
>>>> - ./peg -o $@ $<
>>>> + #./peg -o $@ $<
>>>>
>>>> leg.o : leg.c
>>>>
>>>> leg.c : leg.leg compile.c
>>>> - ./leg -o $@ $<
>>>> + #./leg -o $@ $<
>>> Hmm, why?
>>
>> Because otherwise the compilation fails if the directory is clean, but
>> compile.c or .leg/.peg files have a more recent timestamp than the
>> target.
>
> So that shouldn't normally happen, unless someone modified *.leg/*.peg
> stuff. But in the latter case, the person wants either the .c files
> updated, or at least be notified that this cannot be done automatically.
>
>> These instructions are only useful when developing peg and leg and are
>> safe to skip.
>
> The great thing about free software, is that everybody can develop it,
> including Debian users. So let's not make that harder than necessary. :)
It happens 1) when you retrieve files from VCS systems or 2) when you
need to patch one of those files (it was required in a previous version
of the package).
I think the benefit to allow users developing peg/leg using the Debian
package sources does not compensate the trouble it gives to Debian
maintainers using a VCS.
I agree that a proper patch allowing peg/leg development and building
from scratch would be better, but I have no time for this.
Bests,
Giulio.
Reply to: