hi meem

thanks for the comments! all are accepted bar two i have questions about.
details foillow..

> General:
>
> + I'm confused on the convention for SVCMETHOD scripts -- it seems
> like sometimes we check-in the .sh file and copy the SVCMETHOD
> from the .sh file during the build (such as with inetd), and
> other times we just directly check-in SVCMETHOD and install it.
> Is there a rationale here? Seems like we should pick a convention
> and stick to it.
>

not sure about the rationale, or which is preferred, i'll ask the smf folks.

> * In a number of Makefiles, you've added an include for
> cmd/Makefile.targ. That includes a `clobber' target which often
> overlaps with the one already defined in the Makefile. This
> should be rationalized.
>

now you mentioned it i noticed a few multiple target
warnings and have fixed these.

> src/cmd/Makefile.cmd:
>
> + 238: What does this do? We set ROOTSVCBIN here, then reset it
> on line 242.
>

nothing, as far as i can see. i've removed line 238.

> src/cmd/auditd/Makefile:
>
> + There appears to be quite a bit of brokenness in here that would
> be nice to fix up. Specifically, SUBDIRS is never set so it
> should be stripped from the targets, lines 75-78 should be
> removed, `local_clobber' should be torched, a proper `clean'
> target should be introduced, and `clobber' should come from
> cmd/Makefile.targ. (Oh, and TEXT_DOMAIN is already set from
> Makefile.cmd.)
>

all accepted.

> src/cmd/cmd-inet/usr.lib/Makefile.inetsvc
>
> + We could finish simplifying things by removing lines 30-31,
> 43-46, and 54, and changing lint_SRCS to lint_PROG on line 56.
>

all accepted.

> src/cmd/cmd-inet/usr.lib/in.ripngd/Makefile:
>
> + 76: Might as well fix this to be lint_SRCS.
>

accepted.

> src/cmd/cmd-inet/usr.sbin/Makefile:
>
> * 222: Umm, INTSUBDIRS?
>

oops, fixed, thanks!

> src/cmd/cmd-inet/usr.sbin/in.ftpd/Makefile:
>
> * 12-13: While this probably works, it would be more consistent
> to hoist PROG and SCRIPTS as well.
>

i'm not really sure what you mean here to be honest. can you elaborate
a bit? thanks!

> src/cmd/cmd-inet/usr.sbin/in.rdisc/Makefile:
>
> * 27: Initial include of Makefile.cmd seems unnecessary.
>

true.

> * 32-34, 44: None of this stuff should be needed since this is
> a single-source-file program.
>

ok.

> * 42: Are all of these CPPFLAGS really needed? Why?

BSD_COMP and DSYSV are needed, however no
files in the specified include directory seem to be used
so that can go.

>
> * 48: Makefile.targ should come at the end to avoid overriding
> the default target of `all'.
>

accepted.

> src/cmd/cmd-inet/usr.sbin/in.routed/Makefile:
>
> * 78: Why include Makefile.targ here rather than at the end?
>

i think i forgot to revisit these files to fix the method stuff
to be honest. fixed now.

> src/cmd/cmd-inet/usr.sbin/routeadm/Makefile:
>
> * 30: Remove blank line.
>
> * 34-37: None of this stuff should be needed since this is a
> single-source-file program.
>

both accepted.

> * 46: Are all of these CPPFLAGS really needed? Why?
>

on checking, only one needed is the include of the common/svc
subdirectory. i've removed the rest.

> src/cmd/consadm/Makefile:
>
> * 58-60: Can't this rule be removed as well?
>

yep, missed this one for some reason...

> src/cmd/fs.d/nfs/svc/Makefile:
>
> + Make `all lint' the first target.
>

sure.

> src/cmd/ipf/svc/Makefile:
>
> + Would be nice to change lines 17-23 `all clean lint:', since
> there are no source files.

sure, and i moved include of Makefile.targ to the end also.

>
> src/cmd/lp/cmd/lpsched/Makefile:
>
> + 29: Might as well fix this pathname.
>
> * 38: Remove duplicate MANIFEST setting.
>
> + 154: Could just be lint_SRCS.
>

all accepted.

> src/cmd/print/lp/Makefile:
>
> * Why does this file show up as "new"?
>

it was removed from ON, i've updated my workspace now so it's gone
in the updated webrev.

> src/cmd/lvm/md_monitord/Makefile:
>
> * 92: Is this ROOTMETHOD rule still needed?
>

nope, removed it.

> src/cmd/lvm/*/Makefile:
>
> + I notice all of these LVM Makefiles have a strange disease:
> they all have `-$(RM) $(ROOTPROG)' in their `install' rule.
> This makes no sense to me.
>

yeah, ROOTPROG is not even defined as far as i can discern. i've
removed these.

> src/cmd/lvm/rpc.metamedd/Makefile:
>
> + 43: `check' doesn't descend into SUBDIRS, so this can be
> removed.

sure.

>
> src/cmd/oplhpd/Makefile:
>
> + 52: Take out the extra blank line too, and the two extra ones
> on lines 55-56 while you're at it.
>
> + 70: This `clean' rule is wrong; it should be `$(RM) $(OBJS)'.
>

all accepted.

> src/cmd/picl/picld/Makefile:
>
> + Lines 30-34, 40-41, 65-66, and 71 all appear needless since
> this is a single-source-file program (and line 74 should be
> lint_PROG).
>

all accepted.

> src/cmd/print/gateway/Makefile:
>
> * 114: This should be ROOTSVCMETHOD -- but the whole thing
> looks pretty out-of-date. How about we just torch 103-114?
>

sure.

> src/cmd/rpcbind/Makefile:
>
> + 64, 66-68: This DIRS handling is cruft.
>

yep, i've removed it.

> src/cmd/rpcsvc/Makefile.rpc:
>
> * 33-34: This sentence is incorrect and probably unnecessary.
>

ok, i'll remove it.

> * 40-48: Why not just "ROOTMANIFESTDIR= $(ROOTSVCNETWORK)/rpc"?
> I don't grok what these additional rules are doing.
>

you're right - they actually trigger a "too many targets" warning in
subdirectories since we end up with 2 $(ROOTSVCNETWORK)/rpc targets.

> src/cmd/rpcsvc/rpc.bootparamd/Makefile:
>
> * Why was this file changed?
>

shouldn't have been, mistake on my part.

> src/cmd/sa/Makefile:
>
> * 113-119: Why are these conditional assignments still here?
>

shouldn't be, i've removed them...

> src/cmd/xntpd/xntpd/Makefile:
>
> + 12: The `all' rule should really be moved down to around
> line 24 to be more traditional.
>

sure.

> src/cmd/ypcmd/Makefile:
>
> * 43, 258: Why hasn't ROOTMETHOD been removed and line 258
> changed to ROOTSVCMETHOD?
>

oversight on my part, fixed now.

> src/cmd/zoneadm/Makefile:
>
> * 34, 52: Likewise.

fixed also.

updated webrev:

http://cr.grommit.com/~amaguire/onnv-quagga-updated-2/

if those changes look okay, we'll close out the review. thanks again!

alan
 
 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
_______________________________________________
networking-discuss mailing list
[email protected]

Reply via email to