Re: [lmi] Best way to integrate PCRE

[Vadim Zeitlin]

 Hello again,

 I think we're really close to the solution now, so I'll try to be brief in
this email:

On Wed, 8 Sep 2021 23:16:05 +0000 Greg Chicares <gchicares@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

[...]
GC> What I had in mind instead is that the above commands would run a
GC> full concinnity check, including a genuine 'test_coding_rules' run
GC> that would invoke a pc-linux-gnu binary. Thus, the last line of the
GC> 'check_concinnity' makefile target would have to change, e.g. thus:
GC> 
GC> -   @-cd $(prefascicle_dir) && $(PERFORM) $(TEST_CODING_RULES) *
GC> +   @-cd $(prefascicle_dir) && arch-independent-bindir/$(TEST_CODING_RULES) 
*
GC> 
GC> with corresponding changes elsewhere of course. [But speed-read
GC> ahead to see something I think you'll like better.]

 I don't mind the solution below, of course, but I'm perfectly fine with
this one too and I think it is simpler because it doesn't require modifying
hooks/pre-commit and nychthemeral_test.sh that would need to be updated to
set LMI_TRIPLET=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu otherwise.

 So for now I've implemented this by simply setting LMI_TRIPLET in
custom_tools target itself. The only thing I've changed compared to above
is that I'm using host_xxx variables rather than arch-independent ones
because this better describes them. I hope the use of "host" and "target"
terms is acceptable, as they're standard in the context of discussing
cross-compiling, but they could be changed if you prefer something else, of
course.

 I.e. the rule now looks like this:

---------------------------------- >8 --------------------------------------
custom_tools:
        @$(MAKE) LMI_TRIPLET=$(host_triplet) test_coding_rules
        @$(INSTALL) -c -m 0775 $(TEST_CODING_RULES) $(host_localbindir)
---------------------------------- >8 --------------------------------------

with the host_xxx variables having the expected values.


GC> Can we conclude now that we'd both be satisfied if I replaced my
GC> habitual command:
GC>   make $coefficiency check_concinnity 2>&1 |less -S -N
GC> with this:
GC>   make LMI_TRIPLET=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu $coefficiency check_concinnity 2>&1 
|less -S -N
GC> instead? If that works, then perhaps it's ideal, as it would seem
GC> to require no other change anywhere (except, I guess, in the
GC> hooks that invoke that command).

 To confirm once again, I would, of course, be satisfied by this, but it
just seems to impose an unnecessary extra burden on you, when it doesn't
seem to cost anything to add this override to the makefile itself.

 Of course, if you prefer to do it like this rather than deal with the
question of how should the different variables be named, I don't mind
neither, and you could just omit (or revert) the last commit in my upcoming
PR in this case.


GC> > if it's simpler for you, perhaps I could
GC> > submit the patch in the current state, with concinnity test not working
GC> > under MSW?
GC> 
GC> That sounds okay. But now I'll have only forty hours to test it,
GC> which probably won't be enough because I need to prepare for my
GC> next distraction.

 I hope this distraction is already in the past by now, but I'll check for
your acknowledgement that you have enough time to review this patch before
finally submitting it.

 Thanks in advance,
VZ

pgp1kTPT5BN3S.pgp
Description: PGP signature