Re: ylwrap in gnulib/build-aux?

2011-08-23 Thread Bruno Haible
Hi Karl, > Should the ylwrap script be autoupdated in gnulib/build-aux from > automake, like compile/depcomp/etc./etc.? Nothing in gnulib needs this file so far, and the Automake documentation says that 'automake --install' handles it already: When `lex' or `yacc' sources are used, `automake

ylwrap in gnulib/build-aux?

2011-08-23 Thread Karl Berry
Should the ylwrap script be autoupdated in gnulib/build-aux from automake, like compile/depcomp/etc./etc.? Thanks, k

Re: canonicalize_file_name should support win32 shortcuts

2011-08-23 Thread Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko
On 24.08.2011 00:17, Bruno Haible wrote: > Hi Vladimir, > >>> hash.c in order to properly detect ELOOP, which must be done as part >>> of an unlimited-depth link following algorithm. (If we didn't have >>> the GNU mantra of no arbitrary limits, then we could declare ELOOP at >>> SYMLOOP_MAX instea

Re: canonicalize_file_name should support win32 shortcuts

2011-08-23 Thread Bruno Haible
Hi Vladimir, > > hash.c in order to properly detect ELOOP, which must be done as part > > of an unlimited-depth link following algorithm. (If we didn't have > > the GNU mantra of no arbitrary limits, then we could declare ELOOP at > > SYMLOOP_MAX instead.) > > > Brent's algorithm is universal, se

Re: canonicalize_file_name should support win32 shortcuts

2011-08-23 Thread Sam Steingold
> * Eric Blake [2011-08-23 11:47:57 -0600]: > > On 08/23/2011 11:31 AM, Sam Steingold wrote: >> >>> Maybe we should rename the canonicalize module to instead be >>> canonicalize_filename_mode, since it does _not_ provide canonicalize() >>> (well, canonicalize_filename_mode(file, CAN_EXISTING) is i

Re: I fixed this once already [Was Re: [PATCH] bootstrap: obey --no-git.]

2011-08-23 Thread Gary V. Vaughan
Hi Paul, Just want to keep this on your radar... Also, please note that I've made some small improvements to the script, and pushed to the GNU Zile repository, but not the others listed below. If you'd like me to synchronize before you review, please ask. On 15 Aug 2011, at 09:29, "Gary V. Vaugh

Re: canonicalize_file_name should support win32 shortcuts

2011-08-23 Thread Eric Blake
On 08/23/2011 11:31 AM, Sam Steingold wrote: First of all, newer windows do have symlinks. Does mingw support them natively? If not, then we should get that fixed in mingw; perhaps by starting with an lstat() that actually works on windows symlinks. Second, canonicalize is already an exte

Re: canonicalize_file_name should support win32 shortcuts

2011-08-23 Thread Sam Steingold
> * Eric Blake [2011-08-23 10:35:52 -0600]: > > On 08/23/2011 10:28 AM, Sam Steingold wrote: >>> Does Hurd have SYMLOOP_MAX? If so, then yes, that would be a reasonable >>> change. If not, then how do you propose implementing canonicalize on >>> Hurd, without imposing a limit not already present

Re: canonicalize_file_name should support win32 shortcuts

2011-08-23 Thread Eric Blake
On 08/23/2011 10:28 AM, Sam Steingold wrote: Does Hurd have SYMLOOP_MAX? If so, then yes, that would be a reasonable change. If not, then how do you propose implementing canonicalize on Hurd, without imposing a limit not already present by the system? Are you saying that you want to replace r

Re: canonicalize_file_name should support win32 shortcuts

2011-08-23 Thread Sam Steingold
> * Eric Blake [2011-08-23 08:46:00 -0600]: > > On 08/23/2011 08:41 AM, Sam Steingold wrote: >>> * Eric Blake [2011-08-23 08:03:02 -0600]: >>> >>> On 08/23/2011 07:56 AM, Sam Steingold wrote: Let me reiterate that the size of canonicalize is plain absurd:

Re: canonicalize_file_name should support win32 shortcuts

2011-08-23 Thread Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko
> hash.c in order to properly detect ELOOP, which must be done as part > of an unlimited-depth link following algorithm. (If we didn't have > the GNU mantra of no arbitrary limits, then we could declare ELOOP at > SYMLOOP_MAX instead.) > Brent's algorithm is universal, sets no arbitrary limit and

Re: canonicalize_file_name should support win32 shortcuts

2011-08-23 Thread Eric Blake
On 08/23/2011 08:41 AM, Sam Steingold wrote: * Eric Blake [2011-08-23 08:03:02 -0600]: On 08/23/2011 07:56 AM, Sam Steingold wrote: Let me reiterate that the size of canonicalize is plain absurd: . 150+ files to implement a s

Re: canonicalize_file_name should support win32 shortcuts

2011-08-23 Thread Sam Steingold
> * Eric Blake [2011-08-23 08:03:02 -0600]: > > On 08/23/2011 07:56 AM, Sam Steingold wrote: >> Let me reiterate that the size of canonicalize is plain absurd: >> . >> 150+ files to implement a single function which takes ~160 li

Re: canonicalize_file_name should support win32 shortcuts

2011-08-23 Thread Eric Blake
On 08/23/2011 07:56 AM, Sam Steingold wrote: Let me reiterate that the size of canonicalize is plain absurd: . 150+ files to implement a single function which takes ~160 lines of C code. These files includes things like hash.c a

Re: canonicalize_file_name should support win32 shortcuts

2011-08-23 Thread Sam Steingold
> * Bruno Haible [2011-08-14 14:51:55 +0200]: > > Sam, if 'canonicalize' gets this support, would you be willing to use > 'canonicalize' Let me reiterate that the size of canonicalize is plain absurd: . 150+ files to implement a