[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[avr-libc-dev] RE: [avr-gcc-list] no avr/lib/avr25/attiny13a/Makefile.in

From: Weddington, Eric
Subject: [avr-libc-dev] RE: [avr-gcc-list] no avr/lib/avr25/attiny13a/Makefile.in
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 10:21:50 -0700


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ruud Vlaming [mailto:address@hidden 
> Sent: Friday, January 30, 2009 5:43 AM
> To: Weddington, Eric
> Cc: address@hidden
> Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] no avr/lib/avr25/attiny13a/Makefile.in
> On Thursday 29 January 2009 17:28, you wrote:
> > > If you agree with me that a simple version comparison with a
> > > two digit number, emmiting a warning only is sufficient in this
> > > case i can make the patch.
> > 
> > I'm ok with say that we require some verion >= X. Anything < X 
> > should fail. Anything >= X should be allowed. With X being the
> > lowest version that we check for.  
> Here it is. I added some sed hocus-pocus to normalize the version
> numbers before comparisson. It is NOT bullit proof, but it handles
> one and/or two digit, possibly mixed, version numbers of two and/or 
> three levels, possibly preceded by 'v' and augmented by release 
> denotifiers.


First off, I'm moving this thread to the avr-libc-dev list where it is more 

Second, see an alternative patch that is attached. This is against the 1.6 

It's only had minimal testing. But it avoids the complicated sed magic, and 
string comparison, by instead doing arithmetic expansion on the major and minor 
parts of the version string and then doing arithmetic comparisons. That way we 
can check if the major parts are equal and the minor part of the revision is 
less than some specific value, then abort because the version does not meet the 
minimal requirement.


Joerg, how well would this work on FreeBSD? These changes are only bash-isms 
AFAIK, but you know more about unix compatibility issues.

Eric Weddington

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]