On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 10:17 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > "David Syzdek" <syzdek@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 9:30 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> ... >>> I have a stupid question. >>> >>> Would it be a more appropriate improvement to do it like this: >>> >>> ifdef USE_THIS_AS_UINTMAX_T >>> BASIC_CFLAGS += -Duintmax_t="$(USE_THIS_AS_UINTMAX_T)" >>> endif >>> >>> and then add a section for FreeBSD 4.9-SECURITY like this: >>> >>> ifeq ($(uname_R),4.9-SECURITY) >>> USE_THIS_AS_UINTMAX_T = uint32_t >>> endif >>> >>> That way, an oddball 64-bit machine can use uint64_t here if it wants to, >>> possibly including FreeBSD 4.9-SECURITY backported to 64-bit ;-). >>> >> >> Your suggestion provides more flexibility for other environments. I >> was making the assumption that 64-bit systems would define uintmax_t, >> however in retrospect that would be unwise. >> Would you like me to resubmit the patches with your modifications? > > Actually there was a reason why I said this was a "stupid" question. I > think your assumption on 64-bit platforms would hold in practice, and my > suggestion could be an unnecessary overengineering. If nobody knows of a > system that would benefit from such a generalization, your original patch > would be better, partly because I think: > > (1) USE_THIS_AS_UINTMAX_T is just for demonstration of concept and is a > terrible name we cannot possibly use in our Makefile. We have to > spend brain cycles to come up with a better name; and > > (2) It may be tricky to come up with autoconf macros to determine what to > set USE_THIS_AS_UINTMAX_T to. > > As a slightly unrelated aside, I find it somewhat unfortunate that the > conditional says "4.9-SECURITY", which is a bit too explicit and specific. > to my taste. I do not know how FreeBSD versioning scheme works, but > wouldn't your change work equally well for 4.9-RELEASE or 4.11-RELEASE? > > I suspect that you would want to say "$(uname_R) that begins with '4.' or > smaller needs this workaround", as strtoul(3) manual page seems to appear > first in FreeBSD 5.0-RELEASE (but not found in FreeBSD 4.11-RELEASE). > The following should match against FreeBSD 4.x: FREEBSD_MAJOR := $(shell sh -c 'echo $(uname_R) |cut -d. -f1') ifeq ($(FREEBSD_MAJOR),4) NO_UINTMAX_T = YesPlease NO_STRTOUMAX = YesPlease endif Is the use of FREEBSD_MAJOR okay, or would another name be more appropriate? -- An earthquake wiped out Etchisketchistan today. -- Onion TV -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
