Re: [Tlf-devel] tlf without hamlib?
Hi Ervin, hi Tom, Thanks for your replies. So, if there are no further objections then I put making hamlib mandatory on the top of my list. In fact it seems that even xmlrpc is compiled in the packaged versions. But that I would not touch now. 73, Zoli On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 08:47:36PM +0100, Ervin Hegedüs wrote: > Hi Zoli, > > On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 06:52:33PM +0100, Csahok Zoltan wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Currently tlf has an optional hamlib support. I guess it's optional due > > to historical reasons: hamlib may have been not always available or unstable > > in the past. > > Now hamlib is the de-facto standard rig control library for Linux. > > A quick check of official debian tlf packages shows that in all versions > > hamlib support is compiled in. > > it's just one distribution. There are several others, which > contains Tlf, eg. Gentoo (maintainer is Thomas), SuSE, Slackware, > Arch, and many others. > > > The question: could we make hamlib support mandatory? > > Interesting idea, and I don't know any other reason to do that, > just what if there is a distro, which doesn't distribute the Tlf > with hamlib. > > (After a quick search, in case of most distros I didn't find Tlf, > or if the distro contains, that is a very old version of Tlf, > eg. 1.1.3...) > > > The advantage of this change is that all code parts not using hamlib > > could be disposed of (incl. #ifdef's). Functionally there should be no > > drawbacks, > > as rig control can be disabled with the -r option. > > Note, that you should disable the RIG control if you place a > comment sig to the lines in logcfg.dat, before the RIG_ options. > > > What do you think? Is there a use case for tlf compiled without hamlib? > > I think we should do - but I'm curious about the opinions of > other users. > > > 73, Ervin > HA2OS > ___ Tlf-devel mailing list Tlf-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tlf-devel
[Tlf-devel] code indenting?
Hi, Another topic: as the code has grown over the time and many authors contributed to it the formatting is inherently not consistent. GNU indent is a powerful tool for C source formatting and present in any modern Linux distro. We could define a common style simply by setting up an .indent.pro file. see http://www.gnu.org/software/indent/manual/indent.html#SEC4 I have no particular formatting preferences provided that tab size is 4. Any suggestions? 73, Zoli ___ Tlf-devel mailing list Tlf-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tlf-devel
Re: [Tlf-devel] tlf without hamlib?
Hi Zoli, On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 09:19:45PM +0100, Csahok Zoltan wrote: > Hi Ervin, hi Tom, > > Thanks for your replies. So, if there are no further objections > then I put making hamlib mandatory on the top of my list. > > In fact it seems that even xmlrpc is compiled in the packaged versions. > But that I would not touch now. the xmlrpc related code was my work - it necessary for the Fldigi interface (that's the Fldigi's "official" interface to communicate with external applications). I guess the most Tlf user compiles the binary from source, instead of use the packaged version of current distro. The Hamlib is - as you wrote - the de-facto RIG interface on Linux, so it should be a strict part of Tlf, I think not so much user wants to ignore it. But also I guess, the most user doesn't want to use the xmlrpc, so I'ld keep it as it now exists - just for your info. 73, Ervin ___ Tlf-devel mailing list Tlf-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tlf-devel
Re: [Tlf-devel] code indenting?
Hi Zoli, On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 09:33:43PM +0100, Csahok Zoltan wrote: > Hi, > > Another topic: as the code has grown over the time and many authors > contributed to it the formatting is inherently not consistent. > > GNU indent is a powerful tool for C source formatting and present in any > modern Linux distro. We could define a common style simply by setting up > an .indent.pro file. > see http://www.gnu.org/software/indent/manual/indent.html#SEC4 > > I have no particular formatting preferences provided that tab size is 4. > Any suggestions? I know (superficially) the indent, and support to use it. I agree the 4 for tab size. I preference the -br (if I interpret it as right way), and no other expectation. Anyway, could be review the all possible options, and made a project file as you describe, with different setup. Then reformat the source tree with that, and compare the new format with the old one. The minimal difference wins. :) I'll try to do this at next days - but I'll wait Thomas's opinion. 73, Ervin ___ Tlf-devel mailing list Tlf-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tlf-devel
Re: [Tlf-devel] code indenting?
Hi Zoli and others, Am Wed, 24 Jan 2018 21:33:43 +0100 schrieb Csahok Zoltan : > Hi, > > Another topic: as the code has grown over the time and many authors > contributed to it the formatting is inherently not consistent. > The most inconsistencies are not from contributions in last years but left over from former code in sections we did not change (e.g. audio.c). I put quite some work to bring it at least to a mimimum level of quality and to keep it there (for comparison you may have a look at the old 0.9.34). But anyway I find it a good idea to automate it as much as possible. I used mostly universalindentgui for that, but with the switch to QT5 it no longer compiles. So 'indent', 'astyle', 'bcpp' or similar may be best. > GNU indent is a powerful tool for C source formatting and present in > any modern Linux distro. We could define a common style simply by > setting up an .indent.pro file. > see http://www.gnu.org/software/indent/manual/indent.html#SEC4 > For a similar way you can look up the hamlib mailing list. They use astyle now. > I have no particular formatting preferences provided that tab size is > 4. Any suggestions? I would recommend to choose the settings so, that it reflects the actual code base best and needs no big reformatting session over the whole project. I will look for my setting for the universalindentgui and post it here. By 'tab size' do you mean the size of a tab character or the indentation size normally inserted by tab. For tab characters I am strongly against a size of 4 as it is not the default setting in ALL editors and/or viewers. Tab was and is always 8. Then it would be better to deny tabs at all and replace it by spaces. 4 as indentation size is what we used mostly in the code. That is a good compromise between line size and nesting depth. There are two other points I would suggest: - We should not only look for common formatting rules but additionally define some naming schemes for variables, typedefs and functions. We already have quite a mix in the code, but should use a common scheme for new code and migrate the old one step by step. - I further had a look into the Travis CI which integrates neatly with the github working flow. Maybe we should use it to do common checks on the code automatically. What do you think? 73, Tom DL1JBE -- "Do what is needful!" Ursula LeGuin: Earthsea -- ___ Tlf-devel mailing list Tlf-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tlf-devel
Re: [Tlf-devel] tlf without hamlib?
Hi Zoli, hi Ervin, Am Wed, 24 Jan 2018 21:34:29 +0100 schrieb Ervin Hegedüs : > Hi Zoli, > > On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 09:19:45PM +0100, Csahok Zoltan wrote: > > Hi Ervin, hi Tom, > > > > Thanks for your replies. So, if there are no further objections > > then I put making hamlib mandatory on the top of my list. > > Please go ahead. I would suggest to do it in a separate branch, e.g. 'pre1.4' as we should do a step on the minor version number for that change. 73, de Tom DL1JBE > > In fact it seems that even xmlrpc is compiled in the packaged > > versions. But that I would not touch now. > > the xmlrpc related code was my work - it necessary for the Fldigi > interface (that's the Fldigi's "official" interface to > communicate with external applications). > > I guess the most Tlf user compiles the binary from source, > instead of use the packaged version of current distro. > > The Hamlib is - as you wrote - the de-facto RIG interface on > Linux, so it should be a strict part of Tlf, I think not so much > user wants to ignore it. > > But also I guess, the most user doesn't want to use the xmlrpc, > so I'ld keep it as it now exists - just for your info. > > > 73, Ervin > > > > ___ > Tlf-devel mailing list > Tlf-devel@nongnu.org > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tlf-devel -- "Do what is needful!" Ursula LeGuin: Earthsea -- ___ Tlf-devel mailing list Tlf-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tlf-devel
