threads / discuss / 32378
Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Dec 2012, #04; Sun, 16)
Junio C Hamano wrote:
> It could turn out that we may be able to get rid of sys/param.h > altogether, but one step at a time. Inputs from people on minority > platforms are very much appreciated---does your platform build fine > when the inclusion of the file is removed from git-compat-util.h?
QNX builds fine when sys/param.h is not included.
-- Matt Kraai https://ftbfs.org/kraai
Joachim SchmitzMatt Kraai wrote:
> Junio C Hamano wrote: >> It could turn out that we may be able to get rid of sys/param.h >> altogether, but one step at a time. Inputs from people on minority >> platforms are very much appreciated---does your platform build fine >> when the inclusion of the file is removed from git-compat-util.h? > > QNX builds fine when sys/param.h is not included.
HP-NonStop build fine too without it.
Bye, Jojo
Johannes Sixt> Junio C Hamano wrote: >> It could turn out that we may be able to get rid of sys/param.h >> altogether, but one step at a time. Inputs from people on minority >> platforms are very much appreciated---does your platform build fine >> when the inclusion of the file is removed from git-compat-util.h?
MinGW works fine with sys/param.h removed from git-compat-util.h.
-- Hannes
Junio C Hamanosys/param.h
Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@viscovery.net> writes:
>> Junio C Hamano wrote: >>> It could turn out that we may be able to get rid of sys/param.h >>> altogether, but one step at a time. Inputs from people on minority >>> platforms are very much appreciated---does your platform build fine >>> when the inclusion of the file is removed from git-compat-util.h? > > MinGW works fine with sys/param.h removed from git-compat-util.h.
It seems that OpenBSD 5.2 does not mind it getting removed, either. Debian 5 and Debian 6 seem OK; so do Ubuntu 10.04 and 12.04. I have a hunch that Fedora or anything based on glibc would be fine, too.
What other platforms do we care deeply about?
Junio C Hamano[RFH/PATCH] git-compat-util.h: do not #include <sys/param.h> by default
Earlier we allowed platforms that lack <sys/param.h> not to include the header file from git-compat-util.h; we have included this header file since the early days back when we used MAXPATHLEN (which we no longer use) and also depended on it slurping ULONG_MAX (which we get by including stdint.h or inttypes.h these days).
It turns out that we can compile our modern codebase just file without including it on many platforms (so far, Debian, Ubuntu, MinGW, HP-Nonstop, QNX and z/OS are reported to be OK).
Let's stop including it by default, and on platforms that need it to be included, leave "make NEEDS_SYS_PARAM_H=YesPlease" as an escape hatch and ask them to report to us, so that we can find out about the real dependency and fix it in a more platform agnostic way.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> ---
* I'd propose queuing this on top of dm/port topic, cook it in 'next' for a while and then unleash it to the public.
Makefile | 8 +++++--- configure.ac | 6 ------ git-compat-util.h | 2 +- 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile index 5cd1de0..2c1f04f 100644 --- a/Makefile +++ b/Makefile @@ -167,7 +167,9 @@ all:: # Define NO_POLL if you do not have or don't want to use poll(). # This also implies NO_SYS_POLL_H. # -# Define NO_SYS_PARAM_H if you don't have sys/param.h. +# Define NEEDS_SYS_PARAM_H if you need to include sys/param.h to compile, +# *PLEASE* REPORT to git@vger.kernel.org if your platform needs this; +# we want to know more about the issue. # # Define NO_PTHREADS if you do not have or do not want to use Pthreads. # @@ -1747,8 +1749,8 @@ endif ifdef NO_SYS_POLL_H BASIC_CFLAGS += -DNO_SYS_POLL_H endif -ifdef NO_SYS_PARAM_H - BASIC_CFLAGS += -DNO_SYS_PARAM_H +ifdef NEEDS_SYS_PARAM_H + BASIC_CFLAGS += -DNEEDS_SYS_PARAM_H endif ifdef NO_INTTYPES_H BASIC_CFLAGS += -DNO_INTTYPES_H diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac index e3ab6fe..8fbb533 100644 --- a/configure.ac +++ b/configure.ac @@ -699,12 +699,6 @@ AC_CHECK_HEADER([sys/poll.h], [NO_SYS_POLL_H=UnfortunatelyYes]) GIT_CONF_SUBST([NO_SYS_POLL_H]) # -# Define NO_SYS_PARAM_H if you don't have sys/param.h -AC_CHECK_HEADER([sys/param.h], -[NO_SYS_PARAM_H=], -[NO_SYS_PARAM_H=UnfortunatelyYes]) -GIT_CONF_SUBST([NO_SYS_PARAM_H]) -# # Define NO_INTTYPES_H if you don't have inttypes.h AC_CHECK_HEADER([inttypes.h], [NO_INTTYPES_H=], diff --git a/git-compat-util.h b/git-compat-util.h index d7359ef..a88147b 100644 --- a/git-compat-util.h +++ b/git-compat-util.h @@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ #endif #include <errno.h> #include <limits.h> -#ifndef NO_SYS_PARAM_H +#ifdef NEEDS_SYS_PARAM_H #include <sys/param.h> #endif #include <sys/types.h>
-- 1.8.1.rc2.136.gb42b73a
Torsten BögershausenRe: sys/param.h
On 18.12.12 18:01, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@viscovery.net> writes: > >>> Junio C Hamano wrote: >>>> It could turn out that we may be able to get rid of sys/param.h >>>> altogether, but one step at a time. Inputs from people on minority >>>> platforms are very much appreciated---does your platform build fine >>>> when the inclusion of the file is removed from git-compat-util.h? >> >> MinGW works fine with sys/param.h removed from git-compat-util.h. > > It seems that OpenBSD 5.2 does not mind it getting removed, either. > Debian 5 and Debian 6 seem OK; so do Ubuntu 10.04 and 12.04. I have > a hunch that Fedora or anything based on glibc would be fine, too. > > What other platforms do we care deeply about?
Mac OS X 10.6.8: OK
Erik Faye-LundRe: sys/param.h
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@viscovery.net> writes: > >>> Junio C Hamano wrote: >>>> It could turn out that we may be able to get rid of sys/param.h >>>> altogether, but one step at a time. Inputs from people on minority >>>> platforms are very much appreciated---does your platform build fine >>>> when the inclusion of the file is removed from git-compat-util.h? >> >> MinGW works fine with sys/param.h removed from git-compat-util.h. > > It seems that OpenBSD 5.2 does not mind it getting removed, either. > Debian 5 and Debian 6 seem OK; so do Ubuntu 10.04 and 12.04. I have > a hunch that Fedora or anything based on glibc would be fine, too.
And just to be sure; Fedora 17: OK.
Mark LevedahlRe: sys/param.h
On 12/19/2012 02:59 AM, Erik Faye-Lund wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote: >> Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@viscovery.net> writes: >> >>>> Junio C Hamano wrote: >>>>> It could turn out that we may be able to get rid of sys/param.h >>>>> altogether, but one step at a time. Inputs from people on minority >>>>> platforms are very much appreciated---does your platform build fine >>>>> when the inclusion of the file is removed from git-compat-util.h?
cygwin is fine with that removed.
Mark