module-init-tools-3.3-pre10 available

module-init-tools-3.3-pre10 available

[Jon Masters]

Yo,

After some delay[0] I have uploaded a new version of module-init-tools 
to http://www.kerneltools.org/

This release mostly has a bunch of build fixes, some memory leakage 
cleanups that will benefit systems that actually run out of memory 
(embedded, etc.) and various other things in the changelog.

I plan on a non-pre release soon but need a bit more time to go over the 
current code and look at the tests, etc. Patches welcome, as usual.

Jon.

[0] Suspected mononucleosis...oh such a joyful experience :-)

Re: module-init-tools-3.3-pre10 available

[Jon Masters]

Sergey Vlasov wrote:

> I see that you have merged some patches which change depmod.8.
> However, this file is generated from doc/depmod.sgml, which was not
> changed appropriately.

Ah. A valid point - Luiz, do you want to redo your patch or I can take a 
look at the SGML source myself.

Jon.

Re: module-init-tools-3.3-pre10 available

[Luiz Fernando N. Capitulino]

On Thu, 22 Feb 2007 09:52:20 -0500
Jon Masters <jcm@redhat.com> wrote:

| Sergey Vlasov wrote:
| 
| > I see that you have merged some patches which change depmod.8.
| > However, this file is generated from doc/depmod.sgml, which was not
| > changed appropriately.
| 
| Ah. A valid point - Luiz, do you want to redo your patch or I can take a 
| look at the SGML source myself.

 Urgh, I didn't know that, sorry.

 I can redo my patch, but shouldn't the manpages be removed from the
repository then?

-- 
Luiz Fernando N. Capitulino

Re: module-init-tools-3.3-pre10 available

[Jon Masters]

Luiz Fernando N. Capitulino wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Feb 2007 09:52:20 -0500
> Jon Masters <jcm@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> | Sergey Vlasov wrote:
> | 
> | > I see that you have merged some patches which change depmod.8.
> | > However, this file is generated from doc/depmod.sgml, which was not
> | > changed appropriately.
> | 
> | Ah. A valid point - Luiz, do you want to redo your patch or I can take a 
> | look at the SGML source myself.
> 
>  Urgh, I didn't know that, sorry.
> 
>  I can redo my patch, but shouldn't the manpages be removed from the
> repository then?

I think it's like the configure/Makefile.in situation. These files 
should technically not be in the repo either (and you removed them in 
your tree) but I re-added them because people have an expectation that:

./configure
make

will do something "out of the box". I just need to re-run 
autoconf/automake periodically to keep the files up to date. It's a 
pain, but I'll script that in due course alongside rebuilding the man 
pages - actually, this is probably just a convenient makefile target.

So if you want to redo the patch against those man pages, I'll 
regenerate them prior to pushing the next update. We'll leave it as it 
is until then because the update (IIRC) was just to re-order existing 
content so it's not like we have to push this with urgency.

Jon.

Re: module-init-tools-3.3-pre10 available

[Jan Engelhardt]

On Feb 23 2007 10:41, Jon Masters wrote:
>
> I think it's like the configure/Makefile.in situation. These files should
> technically not be in the repo either (and you removed them in your tree) but I
> re-added them because people have an expectation that:
>
> ./configure
> make
>
> will do something "out of the box".

Out of the box perhaps if it is the .tar.bz2 archive, but the same does not
always hold for CVS repos, much less SVNs [random guess on svn]. He who pulls
from a developer tree mostly knows to run 'autogen.sh' or 'autoreconf -fi'
beforehand.


Jan
-- 

Re: module-init-tools-3.3-pre10 available

[Jon Masters]

Jan Engelhardt wrote:

> Out of the box perhaps if it is the .tar.bz2 archive, but the same does not
> always hold for CVS repos, much less SVNs [random guess on svn]. He who pulls
> from a developer tree mostly knows to run 'autogen.sh' or 'autoreconf -fi'
> beforehand.

You know what, you're right of course. Ok, I'm taking those back *out* 
of the repo in the next update and then will have a script generate 
these for the tarball. That does sound like the right thing.

Thanks!

Jon.

Re: [mit-devel] Re: module-init-tools-3.3-pre10 available

[Sergey Vlasov]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 788 bytes --]

On Sat, Feb 24, 2007 at 11:13:45AM -0500, Jon Masters wrote:
> Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> 
> >Out of the box perhaps if it is the .tar.bz2 archive, but the same does not
> >always hold for CVS repos, much less SVNs [random guess on svn]. He who 
> >pulls
> >from a developer tree mostly knows to run 'autogen.sh' or 'autoreconf -fi'
> >beforehand.
> 
> You know what, you're right of course. Ok, I'm taking those back *out* 
> of the repo in the next update and then will have a script generate 
> these for the tarball. That does sound like the right thing.

Has a final decision about generated files been made?  I don't see any
updates in the git repo, and man pages are still broken (any attempt
to regenerate them will cause changes to the generated files to be
lost).

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [mit-devel] Re: module-init-tools-3.3-pre10 available

[Jon Masters]

Sergey Vlasov wrote:

> Has a final decision about generated files been made?  I don't see any
> updates in the git repo, and man pages are still broken

I'm doing some patching this afternoon anyway, and it's on my todo.

Jon.

Re: [mit-devel] Re: module-init-tools-3.3-pre10 available

[Jon Masters]

Jon Masters wrote:

> Sergey Vlasov wrote:
> 
>> Has a final decision about generated files been made?  I don't see any
>> updates in the git repo, and man pages are still broken
> 
> I'm doing some patching this afternoon anyway, and it's on my todo.

I pushed up v3.3-pre11 just now. If all goes to plan, this will become a 
final release so we can move on to more cleanups for a v3.4.

Jon.

Re: [mit-devel] Re: module-init-tools-3.3-pre10 available

[Luiz Fernando N. Capitulino]

Em Tue, 20 Mar 2007 23:03:45 +0300
Sergey Vlasov <vsu@altlinux.ru> escreveu:

| On Sat, Feb 24, 2007 at 11:13:45AM -0500, Jon Masters wrote:
| > Jan Engelhardt wrote:
| > 
| > >Out of the box perhaps if it is the .tar.bz2 archive, but the same does not
| > >always hold for CVS repos, much less SVNs [random guess on svn]. He who 
| > >pulls
| > >from a developer tree mostly knows to run 'autogen.sh' or 'autoreconf -fi'
| > >beforehand.
| > 
| > You know what, you're right of course. Ok, I'm taking those back *out* 
| > of the repo in the next update and then will have a script generate 
| > these for the tarball. That does sound like the right thing.
| 
| Has a final decision about generated files been made?  I don't see any
| updates in the git repo, and man pages are still broken (any attempt
| to regenerate them will cause changes to the generated files to be
| lost).

 I've asked Jon to drop the manpage patches, I won't work on m-i-t
tools anytime soon.

-- 
Luiz Fernando N. Capitulino