Re: bug#13928: [PATCH] plans: enabling subdir-object by default is blocked on bug#13928

2014-04-22 Thread Bert Wesarg
Stefano, may it be possible to disable the 'subdir-object is the default'-warning in the 1.14 release series than? We should have this warning only active when we are sure that this bug is resolved. Thanks. Bert On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 4:32 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > Signed-off-by: Stefano

Re: bug#13524: [PATCH 1/2] preproc: add support for relative names in included fragments

2013-03-11 Thread Bert Wesarg
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 10:46 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > On 03/11/2013 10:31 AM, Bert Wesarg wrote: >> I have the impression that variable references in filenames aren't >> supported anyway, right? >> > Wrong, actually. But when I prefixing a source file with &#x

Re: bug#13524: [PATCH 1/2] preproc: add support for relative names in included fragments

2013-03-11 Thread Bert Wesarg
Hi, I have one more question here: On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > On 02/14/2013 01:20 PM, Bert Wesarg wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 11:26 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >> What definitily will not work ist something like this,

Re: bug#13524: [PATCH 1/2] preproc: add support for relative names in included fragments

2013-02-14 Thread Bert Wesarg
Hi, On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 11:26 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > From: Peter Rosin > > The rationale for this change is that it is annoying to have > to repeat the directory name when including a Makefile fragment. > For deep directory structures these repeats can generate a lot > of bloat. It

Re: [PATCH] check: don't use multi-line coloring for the report

2011-07-03 Thread Bert Wesarg
Hi again, On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:33, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > On Friday 17 June 2011, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >> Hi Bert, and thanks again for your patch. >> >> I have some minor observations and objections below (please do not take >> them as a belittling of your work; they are either con

RE: [PATCH] check: don't use multi-line

2011-06-19 Thread Bert Wesarg
> Hi Bert, and thanks again for your patch. Hi, > I have some minor observations and objections below (please do not take them > as a belittling of your work; they are either constructive criticism, or > requests for cosmetic changes mandated by the GNU coding standards). > I hope you have time

[PATCH] check: don't use multi-line coloring for the report

2011-06-17 Thread Bert Wesarg
40 +--- 3 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) diff --git a/ChangeLog b/ChangeLog index e468ef3..492afe5 100644 --- a/ChangeLog +++ b/ChangeLog @@ -1,3 +1,12 @@ +2011-06-17 Bert Wesarg + + check: don't use multi-line coloring for the report +

Re: [PATCH] check: don't use multi-line coloring for the report

2011-06-17 Thread Bert Wesarg
Hi, On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 17:12, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > Hi Bert, and thanks for persiting on this. only for today, I'm in vacation for the next two weeks ;-) But I try to post a patch today. > You could avoid the use of printf above by using the "automatic concatenation" > feature of awk:

Re: [PATCH] check: don't use multi-line coloring for the report

2011-06-17 Thread Bert Wesarg
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 22:00, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > Hello, > > * Bert Wesarg wrote on Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 08:19:23PM CEST: >> the parallel part is a little trickier. Because the line printing is >> done by awk. I would like to know, whether it is portable to use the >

Re: [PATCH] check: don't use multi-line coloring for the report

2011-06-16 Thread Bert Wesarg
Hi, the parallel part is a little trickier. Because the line printing is done by awk. I would like to know, whether it is portable to use the printf function of awk. It is POSIX, but you may know that this doesn't count much. I couldn't find any prior usage in automake and autoconf either. Nor doe

Re: [PATCH] check: don't use multi-line coloring for the report

2011-06-16 Thread Bert Wesarg
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 09:41, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > I verified that the problem you reported is really present, and > I agree it would be nice to fix it. > > However, your patch fixes the problem only fot the old "serial" > testsuite harness, not for the new "parallel" one.  It would be > ni

[PATCH] check: don't use multi-line coloring for the report

2011-06-15 Thread Bert Wesarg
less can't handle coloring which spans newlines because of performance reasons. Thus, color each line of the check report by its own. --- For reference, git had a similar problem and I talked to the less maintainer about the problem. Here is the resulting fix in git: http://repo.or.cz/w/git.git/