On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 6:42 PM, Pádraig Brady <p...@draigbrady.com> wrote:
> On 19/10/15 21:21, Gavin Smith wrote: > > I'm interested in reducing the number of checks done in a configure > > script: one way could be to make more use of conditional dependencies > > between modules. gnulib-tool --add-import lists the modules which were > > used and which were brought in as dependencies. However, there are > > some things I'd like to do that I couldn't find options for. One is to > > see which modules brought in a module. The way I was doing this was by > > going into the "gnulib/modules" directory in the Gnulib checkout and > > grepping for the name of the module. It would be nice to be able to > > get this information automatically, and in a way that takes into > > account indirect dependencies. Maybe there should be an option for > > gnulib-tool that can list the modules that have been brought in, and > > for each of them, list the modules that have been explicitly asked for > > that depend on the module, directly or indirectly, and also list the > > modules that depend on the module conditionally. > > > > For example I wondered why the checks for the unistd module were being > > run. I found that getopt-posix had a dependency on it. I edited the > > module file to make this a conditional dependency, reran gnulib-tool > > --add-import, ran "make configure" to remake the configure script: but > > when I ran "configure" again, the tests were still run. I expected > > that there was another module also depending on unistd, but it wasn't > > immediately obvious which one, because several modules that could have > > been imported depended on unistd. That's as far as I got investigating > > the matter. Is there an easier way to investigate this kind of thing, > > that I've been missing? Or would gnulib-tool benefit from the extra > > functionality I've suggested? > > There was some work on displaying a graph previously. > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2011-03/msg00276.html > Something like this is worth adding I think Hmm, I see this linked to my gitorious thing which hasn't been archived yet, and isn't available anywhere else... If there is still interest in this c variation (i'd found the shell i'd come up with up thread from there excessively slow). let me know and i can come up with a patch or at least send a tar-ball for the archives.
