On 01/12/18 4:36 AM, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
Tried playing with this just a bit, and please don't get the wrong
idea with all the "it doesn't work complaints". I think this is an
amazing attempt at automating ChangeLogs.
Thanks, I'm looking for "it doesn't work" kind of feedback because that
allows me to improve the script.
But I'm a bit confundled, I tried this on one change in the glibc tree
(see below). While it is true that _itoa.h was included, it isn't
really a function so it shouldn't be listed as such.
This one's pretty easy to fix. I suppose I was just being lazy because
the script already knows that it's a header so it only needs to use that
information to write a more sensible output.
The "Modified." comment seems to be redundant, since <_itoa.h> is
included it is by definition that elf/dl-exception.c was modified so
this should at least be "elf/dl-exception.c (_itoa.h): New.".
The "Modified" comment is for the source file as a whole. I'll try to
make this a bit more readable.
I also tried running it on two recent commit on the Emacs tree, that
got it confunlded quite badly; and produced ~740 lines of output.
With some really weird results... Maybe I ran it incorrectly?
It's more likely that the script is barfing; I'll check this out.
For the format, would it make sense to maybe change it to put the hash
in the header instead of a "COMMIT:" "thing"? Maybe one could extend
the format a bit to suggest this if it makes good sense.
I'm open to suggestions on the format.
I suppose I also need to push the patch up to atleast a private branch
in glibc so that people can check out and play with the latest version
with fixes. I'll do that tonight.
Siddhesh
