[ksh93-integration-discuss] Re: [osol-code] Round two:((pre-)pre-review)ksh93-integrationwebrev2007-02-02

[I. Szczesniak]

On 3/8/07, Peter Memishian <peter.memishian at sun.com> wrote:
>
>  > >  > The one reason I can think of to keep them is that they provide some
>  > >  > clues about how ksh93 is built using the ATT toolset.  So, for example,
>  > >  > if we run into problems, they provide a comparison point.  And if the
>  > >  > upstream version changes, the diffs for the ATT makefile may be useful
>  > >  > in constructing the changes to the ON makefile.
>  > >
>  > > Can't we get the diffs for the ATT Makefiles regardless of whether we have
>  > > copies of them lying around in our tree?
>  >
>  > What do you mean with "diffs" in this case ?
>
> I meant the difference between one ATT Makefile and another.
>
>  > destination files would act like a bomb in this case and we have to
>  > manually strip the diff or someone invent a new type of exception
>  > handling (renaming parts of the diff files would be slightly easier...).
>
> Since applying those diffs has no direct effect on the binaries built by
> our source tree anyway (even if we kept the ATT Makefiles), someone is
> going to need to manually make the corresponding changes to ON's Makefiles
> (if changes are even appropriate).

Let's ignore the ATT Makefiles for a while. Are there other files
you'd like to see removed? A list based on Roland's annotated list
would be nice.

Irek