[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] What's the rationale behind the cmd-build-config.c
From: |
Andrew Suffield |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] What's the rationale behind the cmd-build-config.c restrictions? |
Date: |
Fri, 28 Jan 2005 16:03:09 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i |
On Fri, Jan 28, 2005 at 09:10:52AM -0600, Rob Browning wrote:
> Andrew Suffield <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > On Thu, Jan 27, 2005 at 09:46:41AM -0600, Rob Browning wrote:
> >>
> >> In cmd-build-config.c we have:
> >>
> >> if (!arch_valid_config_name (config))
> >> {
> >> safe_printfmt (2, "%s: invalid config name (%s)\n",
> >> argv[0], config);
> >> exit (2);
> >> }
> >>
> >> tree_root = arch_tree_root (0, dir, 0);
> >>
> >> if (!tree_root)
> >> {
> >> safe_printfmt (2, "%s: not in project tree (%s)\n",
> >> argv[0], dir);
> >> exit (1);
> >> }
> >>
> >> What's the rationale behind these restrictions?
> >
> > Nothing relevant, it's a bug. It's a very old bug that should have
> > been fixed a long time ago.
>
> Do you have any idea if the fix is likely to be as simple as removing
> that bit, or are there probably other changes that would need to be
> made?
If you knock out that one then an invariant() call deeper in will trap
you. If you remove them both then it'll work. There's also a similar,
even more broken test in catcfg.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature