Roland Mainz wrote: > > AFAIK there isn't such a rule... and sometimes I'm tempted to file a bug > and then just fix all the SFWNV scripts... the question is whether there > is anyone willing to sponsor such a monster patch... > ... erm... are there any volunteers ?
Thanks for recording these, it's useful to have them in the list archives. Please do file bugs if you're interested in pursuing it. I suggest don't file "a" bug, it'll be way too broad. File specific ones for each scenario. Then follow up each with a discussion thread on sfwnv-discuss to see if there is some consensus on establishing guidelines. For those that do reach consensus, it'll be [only] then worth taking the time to create patches. Some are clearly IMO not worth spending time on, such as combining rm invocations in the name of efficiency. Saving a couple seconds on a 3-7 hour build run isn't interesting (particularly the rm calls on 'clean' targets which aren't even used by the build ;-) -- Jyri J. Virkki - jyri.virkki at sun.com - Sun Microsystems
