Re: VxWorks Patches Back from the Dead!

[rbmj <rbmj at verizon dot net>]

On 8/25/2012 11:35 PM, rbmj wrote:
> On 8/24/2012 4:59 PM, Bruce Korb wrote:
> > Hi Robert,
> >
> > If you are going to defer, then:
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 1:20 PM, rbmj <rbmj@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > diff --git a/fixincludes/fixinc.in b/fixincludes/fixinc.in
> > > index e73aed9..de7be35 100755
> > > --- a/fixincludes/fixinc.in
> > > +++ b/fixincludes/fixinc.in
> > > @@ -128,6 +128,18 @@ fi
> > >
> > >   # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
> > >   #
> > > +#  Check to see if the machine_name fix needs to be disabled.
> > > +#
> > > +
> > > +case "${target_canonical}" in
> > > +    *-*-vxworks*)
> > > +    machine_name_override="OVERRIDE"
> > ^^^^ replace this line with:
> >
> >         test -f ${MACRO_LIST} && rm -f ${MACRO_LIST}
> >
> > The remaining part of the patch to this file is not necessary.
>
> I like it!
>
> Done, and patch is attached.

OK.  make install doesn't seem to like it as much as I do.  It complains 
because it tries to install macro_list and can't find it.  Proposed 
solutions:

1. Change line to read test -f ${MACRO_LIST} && echo > ${MACRO_LIST}
Advantages- easy, simple
Disadvantages- might cause an unnecessary run of the fix.  A very, very 
small potential compile time hit.

2. Change line to read test -f ${MACRO_LIST} && rm -f ${MACRO_LIST} && 
touch ${MACRO_LIST}
Advantages- Will not unnecessarily run machine_name.  Saves 4 bytes of 
disk usage over option 1 :D
Disadvantages- Looks rather hackish; something about it feels wrong

3. Make macro_list optional for installation
Disadvantages- more complex, and I don't really feel like going back 
into the makefiles again.  That's a scary place.

--
rbmj