Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/2001/02/24/03:15:35
> From: "Juan Manuel Guerrero" <ST001906 AT HRZ1 DOT HRZ DOT TU-Darmstadt DOT De>
> Organization: Darmstadt University of Technology
> Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 23:30:48 +0200
>
> > > *** gettext-2001-02-05.orig/djgpp/config.sed Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
> > > --- gettext-2001-02-05/djgpp/config.sed Fri Feb 16 18:12:28 2001
> > > ***************
> > > *** 0 ****
> > [snip]
> > > + s,\\.old\\.,_old.,g\
> > > + s,\\.tab\\.c,_tab.c,g\
> > > + s,\\.tab\\.h,_tab.h,g\
> > > + s,gettext-1,gettext.1,g\
> > > + s,gettext-2,gettext.2,g\
> > > + s,msgcmp-1,msgcmp.1,g\
> > > + s,msgcmp-2,msgcmp.2,g\
> >
> > Shouldn't this use fnchange.lst file instead of repeating the same
> > conversions twice in two different places?
>
> fnchange.lst is used to rename the files during extraction. config.sed
> is used to modify the configure script. This modified configure script
> will create a DJGPP suitable makefile. Both conversions are need.
I know, but that's not what I meant. What I wanted to say is that in
both cases, the same files are renamed. So it might be a good idea to
have the list of renamings in one place, instead of maintaining two
separate lists. Two lists might get out of sync.
For example, you could produce config.sed and fnchange.lst from one
master copy of the file-name changes. Or you could produce
fnchange.lst by editing config.sed.
- Raw text -