Amanda Waite wrote: > Paul Cunningham wrote: >> >> + >> Lines 124 & 125 and 107 & 108, do you really need to >> do these 'chmod's, if not remove them (might reduce >> build time a tiny bit). >> > > Is it ok to do this? The reason that this was done is that generally > when we first start out doing integration work for SFW we are told to > look at what others have done and occasionally we did things without > fully understanding why we were doing them. It seems the chmodS on the > directories and files in the source bundle are there to avoid any > possible problems with permissions being mangled by umask and such. When > I'm building Ruby from source I don't chmod everything first and we are > quite happy to drop these lines if we know for certain that after > putback, when the gate is built it won't break horribly. I'm not > particularly conservative except when it comes to doing something that > might result in getting Mike up at 3AM to fix a broken build.
I seem to remember that those "find .... chmod ..." lines are very historic and go back to when the early sfw packages were in the companion-cd gate. In some cases they were needed but in most they were not - they just got propagated from one old package to the next new pkg, etc, etc. And I know I should be blamed for some of that propagation (way back)! So unless it is really needed it's probably best, in my opinion, not to have it. But what does the gatekeeper/c-team think? Paul -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul Cunningham Software Engineer Tadpole Computer Products
