Ok. Both patches have been applied. Thanks. Still waiting on Natalia to get OS/2 access set up for developers. If however you want to or set up some sort of access to OS/2 for folks to test on that'd be great.
(Five years ago this wasn't a requirement. Things have changed - it now is.) On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 10:48 PM, KO Myung-Hun <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi/2. > > Rocky Bernstein wrote: > > Ok, then you can be responsible for OS/2 . That means that you will be > > expected to test, in advance, releases. Note that this is a change from > the > > laxness we've had in the past with respect to releases. > > > > No problem. > > > If you disappear and there is no one else to take responsibility, the > > ability to test OS/2 disappears, then OS/2 support in libcdio may > disappear > > as well. > > > > Ooops... I feel the very much responsibility. ^^ > > >> What about testing an OS getopt first ? > > > > We have 7 or so drivers that work with the supplied getopt.c and one that > > doesn't. And for that one driver we have maybe two people who use that. > > Even here, their use is probably infrequently for say Mplayer while the > > uses elsewhere span audio ripping, other media players, making boot CDs > and > > lots of other things I probably don't know about. So guess which way > causes > > the least disruption to the majority of users and developers? > > > > Hmmm... I don't think this is a problem of quantity. But this is not a > important part. > > > Couple that with the fact currently we don't have rigorous tests either > > getopt routine to make sure that works. It's possible, though that in > one > > of the larger integration tests, we might catch a malfunctioning getopt, > > but I wouldn't want to count on that. > > > > If you want to start writing a test suite for getopt whether it the > > provided one or the OS-supplied one, we can reconsider. But given things > > are currently the way they are, if the supplied getopt works, it's better > > to to use that, because assuming the getopt.c compiles as it was > intended, > > we *know* what the intended behavior is. > > > > Ok. I agree. So I approach in other way. > > Review, please... > > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 10:12 PM, KO Myung-Hun <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> Rocky Bernstein wrote: > >>> Sorry for the delay. Things have been busy for me. > >>> > >> > >> No problem. ^^ > >> > >>> It is interesting to hear back after the 5 or so years. About a month > >> and a > >>> half ago we were discussing dropping libcdio's OS/2 driver altogether. > >> See > >>> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libcdio-devel/2014-06/msg00004.html > >>> > >>> What motivated this was the desire to change the API to add > >> get_track_isrc > >>> and Robert Kausch mentioned he had no way to test OS/2. In that, we > >>> realized that basically no one *is* actively testing OS/2. > >>> > >>> Aside from yourself and possibly Natalia, do you know anyone else that > is > >>> using this? > >>> > >> > >> I don't know. But those who want to build MPlayer with audio cd > >> supports, would be using libcdio. > >> > >>> Given the low activity and difficulty for finding developers and > testers, > >>> I'm inclined to have this maintained by you and Natalia in separately. > >> She > >>> already has a fork on github of libcdio-paranoia. > >>> > >>> If OS/2 is to survive in libcdio, someone needs to commit to handle > >>> problems and API changes as such things arise. Are you willing to > commit > >> to > >>> this? > >>> > >> > >> Of course. Five years ago, it's me to submit OS/2 patches as you know. > ^^ > >> > >>> Lastly, on the first patch. It has to do with deciding on whether the > use > >>> the libcdio-supplied getopt.c,and this is based purely on OS. OS/2 is > the > >>> only one to not used the supplied getopt.c > >>> > >>> Rather than have a test by OS, I'd prefer a test to compile the > supplied > >>> getopt; if that fails, then run a test to see if there is an OS > getopt. > >>> > >> > >> Ok. What about testing an OS getopt first ? I think, it's better to > >> consider libcdio-getopt as a fallback. > >> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 11:50 PM, KO Myung-Hun <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> > >>>> Ping ? > >>>> > >>>> KO Myung-Hun wrote: > >>>>> Hi/2, long tiem no see. ^^ > >>>>> > >>>>> I attach the patches to build libcdio and to enhance memory usage on > >>>> OS/2. > >>>>> > >>>>> Review, please... > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >> > >> -- > >> KO Myung-Hun > >> > >> Using Mozilla SeaMonkey 2.7.2 > >> Under OS/2 Warp 4 for Korean with FixPak #15 > >> In VirtualBox v4.1.32 on Intel Core i7-3615QM 2.30GHz with 8GB RAM > >> > >> Korean OS/2 User Community : http://www.ecomstation.co.kr > >> > >> > >> > > > > -- > KO Myung-Hun > > Using Mozilla SeaMonkey 2.7.2 > Under OS/2 Warp 4 for Korean with FixPak #15 > In VirtualBox v4.1.32 on Intel Core i7-3615QM 2.30GHz with 8GB RAM > > Korean OS/2 User Community : http://www.ecomstation.co.kr > >
