Hello,

 What is the purpose of this code in setup-gcc.sh?

# 1. Remove d sources from d_gccsrc if already exist
test -h "$d_gccsrc/gcc/d" && rm "$d_gccsrc/gcc/d"
test -d "$d_gccsrc/libphobos" && rm -r "$d_gccsrc/libphobos"
if test -e "$d_gccsrc/gcc/d" -o -e "$d_gccsrc/libphobos"; then
    echo "error: cannot update gcc source, please remove D sources by hand."
    exit 1
fi

For example, the line

test -h "$d_gccsrc/gcc/d" && rm "$d_gccsrc/gcc/d"

should return 0 if $d_gccsrc/gcc/d both exists and is a symlink. The command fails if any of the two is not true, and the intended purpose is to remove the original D sources from the gcc package (that is, when the "d" folder exists, but is *not* a symlink).

However, if the "d" folder exists and is *not* a symlink, the exit code of "test" will be 1, that is the command will *not* succeed.

In that case, the "rm" part will not be executed, which destroys the purpose of it.

Do I miss something?


More, why testing for symlink-ness in the first place? Existing sources (or symlink towards them) should be deleted and, then, newly-provided sources should be provided, that's all. What if an existing symlink exists, but points to an outdated D source?

Slightly different question about setup-gcc.sh.

If you run it on the gcc-4.8.1 sources, having run it previously, you get the following error message:

	Reversed (or previously applied) patch detected!  Assume -R? [n]

... what's the correct response here? :-)

On 7 June 2013 13:55, Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling@webdrake.net> wrote:
> Slightly different question about setup-gcc.sh.
>
> If you run it on the gcc-4.8.1 sources, having run it previously, you get the following error message:
>
>         Reversed (or previously applied) patch detected!  Assume -R? [n]
>
> ... what's the correct response here? :-)

You should run setup-gcc.sh with --update.  That skips applying the
patches (again)

--
Iain Buclaw

*(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';

On 06/07/2013 04:05 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> You should run setup-gcc.sh with --update.  That skips applying the
> patches (again)

Cool, thanks. :-)

On 7 June 2013 13:26, eles <eles@eles.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
>  What is the purpose of this code in setup-gcc.sh?
>
> # 1. Remove d sources from d_gccsrc if already exist
> test -h "$d_gccsrc/gcc/d" && rm "$d_gccsrc/gcc/d"
> test -d "$d_gccsrc/libphobos" && rm -r "$d_gccsrc/libphobos"
> if test -e "$d_gccsrc/gcc/d" -o -e "$d_gccsrc/libphobos"; then
>     echo "error: cannot update gcc source, please remove D sources by hand."
>     exit 1
> fi
>
> For example, the line
>
> test -h "$d_gccsrc/gcc/d" && rm "$d_gccsrc/gcc/d"
>
> should return 0 if $d_gccsrc/gcc/d both exists and is a symlink. The command fails if any of the two is not true, and the intended purpose is to remove the original D sources from the gcc package (that is, when the "d" folder exists, but is *not* a symlink).
>
> However, if the "d" folder exists and is *not* a symlink, the exit code of "test" will be 1, that is the command will *not* succeed.
>
> In that case, the "rm" part will not be executed, which destroys the purpose of it.
>
> Do I miss something?
>
>
> More, why testing for symlink-ness in the first place? Existing sources (or symlink towards them) should be deleted and, then, newly-provided sources should be provided, that's all. What if an existing symlink exists, but points to an outdated D source?

The gcc/d folder is symlinked to the gdc sources, so any updates in gdc will reflect in the gcc/d tree.

--
Iain Buclaw

*(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';

On Friday, 7 June 2013 at 14:07:27 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> On 7 June 2013 13:26, eles <eles@eles.com> wrote:
>
> The gcc/d folder is symlinked to the gdc sources, so any updates in
> gdc will reflect in the gcc/d tree.

I think there is a confusion. The code that I quoted used to workk with gcc-4.8 (4.8.0) source package of Debian/ubuntu, since it did *not* include a src/gcc/d/ subfolder and a src/libphobos/ subfolder.

Things changed when the package was updated to gcc-4.8.1, as the changelog show it:

http://ftp-master.metadata.debian.org/changelogs//main/g/gcc-4.8/gcc-4.8_4.8.1-2_changelog

"* Build D and libphobos packages from this source package."

That makes the gcc-4.8 (4.8.1) package to include a src/libphobos and a src/gcc/d folders. The code that I quoted in the beginning will fail with asking to manually remove the d sources form the gcc tree.

The setup-gcc.sh should be modified accordingly: it does not try to remove the folders libphobos/ and gcc/d, still complains about their presence afterwards.

BTW, what version of gdc does the gcc-4.8 (4.8.1) package ships with?

On 7 June 2013 16:28, eles <eles@eles.com> wrote:
> On Friday, 7 June 2013 at 14:07:27 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>>
>> On 7 June 2013 13:26, eles <eles@eles.com> wrote:
>>
>> The gcc/d folder is symlinked to the gdc sources, so any updates in gdc will reflect in the gcc/d tree.
>
>
> I think there is a confusion. The code that I quoted used to workk with gcc-4.8 (4.8.0) source package of Debian/ubuntu, since it did *not* include a src/gcc/d/ subfolder and a src/libphobos/ subfolder.
>

Me and Matthias did this deliberately to make maintenance easier.


> Things changed when the package was updated to gcc-4.8.1, as the changelog show it:
>
> http://ftp-master.metadata.debian.org/changelogs//main/g/gcc-4.8/gcc-4.8_4.8.1-2_changelog
>
> "* Build D and libphobos packages from this source package."
>
> That makes the gcc-4.8 (4.8.1) package to include a src/libphobos and a src/gcc/d folders. The code that I quoted in the beginning will fail with asking to manually remove the d sources form the gcc tree.
>
> The setup-gcc.sh should be modified accordingly: it does not try to remove the folders libphobos/ and gcc/d, still complains about their presence afterwards.
>

So you must remove these by hand.  If it doesn't give that error to you, let me know.  =)


> BTW, what version of gdc does the gcc-4.8 (4.8.1) package ships with?
>
>

It is the current development snapshot as of 1st June 2013... or there abouts.

--
Iain Buclaw

*(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';

On Friday, 7 June 2013 at 16:07:46 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> On 7 June 2013 16:28, eles <eles@eles.com> wrote:
>> On Friday, 7 June 2013 at 14:07:27 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>>>
>>> On 7 June 2013 13:26, eles <eles@eles.com> wrote:
>>>
> So you must remove these by hand.  If it doesn't give that error to
> you, let me know.  =)

Shouldn't be better to replace those lines:

test -h "$d_gccsrc/gcc/d" && rm "$d_gccsrc/gcc/d"
test -d "$d_gccsrc/libphobos" && rm -r "$d_gccsrc/libphobos"

with:

rm -rf "$d_gccsrc/gcc/d"
rm -rf "$d_gccsrc/libphobos"

?