X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Received: by onstor-exch02.onstor.net 
	id <01C87420.0E9F1C08@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>; Wed, 20 Feb 2008 17:24:01 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: please review 27937
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 17:24:00 -0700
Message-ID: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0875E3CA@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
In-Reply-To: <20080220153459.629e37ce@ripper.onstor.net>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: please review 27937
Thread-Index: Ach0GTVXVvhXM8czRxCtT16Z8vNKtwABNF/g
References: <20080220141254.2692db28@ripper.onstor.net><BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0875E2B4@onstor-exch02.onstor.net><20080220145031.7a6849cd@ripper.onstor.net><BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0875E336@onstor-exch02.onstor.net> <20080220153459.629e37ce@ripper.onstor.net>
From: "Maxim Kozlovsky" <maxim.kozlovsky@onstor.com>
To: "Andy Sharp" <andy.sharp@onstor.com>
Cc: "Larry Scheer" <larry.scheer@onstor.com>



>-----Original Message-----
>From: Andy Sharp
>Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 3:35 PM
>To: Maxim Kozlovsky
>Cc: Larry Scheer
>Subject: Re: please review 27937
>
>On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 15:07:03 -0800 "Maxim Kozlovsky"
><maxim.kozlovsky@onstor.com> wrote:
>
>> This is not very convincing. I don't know where you got the idea that
>> the code compiled for eee should include linux.h. If your code is
>> compiled for linux, it will include linux.h. If it is compiled on
eee,
>> it should not include linux.h, because eee is not linux. If you want
>> to include some file depending on whether it is cougar or bobcat, you
>> can put your file in Includes/[cg|bc].
>
>You are not correct because you are assuming our code complies with
>some perfect design standard, where there is no code in sm-whatever
>that has anything to do with SSC.  That simply is not the case.
[MK]=20

It is the case though that the current rules for the include files are
what I've just described above. Since you can fix your bug without
changing the rules I don't see why you should change them.=20




>
>> By the way, why do you need to port sm-seep to linux? We already have
>> everything ported, cm_read_seep_bc() etc.
>
>Feel free to take a look at the changelist:
>
>Change 27934 by andys@ripper on 2008/02/19 11:56:49 *pending*
>
>        Fix for TED00022316 - system show version gives wrong boot dev
>
>        Port to Linux: make values of devices displayed by commands
>        correct for Linux or OpenBSD.
>
>        reviewed by
>
>Affected files ...
>
>... //depot/dev/nfx-tree/code/sm-seep/env-api.h#2 edit
>... //depot/dev/nfx-tree/code/sm-seep/env.c#6 edit
>... //depot/dev/nfx-tree/code/sm-seep/linux.h#1 add
>... //depot/dev/nfx-tree/code/sm-seep/openbsd.h#1 add
>... //depot/dev/nfx-tree/code/sm-seep/seep-api.c#7 edit
>
>
>
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: Andy Sharp
>> >Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 2:51 PM
>> >To: Maxim Kozlovsky
>> >Cc: Larry Scheer
>> >Subject: Re: please review 27937
>> >
>> >On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 14:18:14 -0800 "Maxim Kozlovsky"
>> ><maxim.kozlovsky@onstor.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> What does "It" in "it builds" mean? Did you do a clean build? I am
>> >> sure I did this for the reason and I don't appreciate your calling
>> >> this "abuse". The world of Oss is not limited to linux and
openbsd,
>> >> you know. EEE is also an OS in some sense.
>> >
>> >Actually, I do hear what you're saying.  I started down the path of
>> >creating a new variable, SSC_OS and setting OS_INCL based on that,
>> >but I encountered some problem that involved intracacies with our
>> >include files around nfxnis and rpc/xdr and stuff.  I couldn't get
>> >that
>> resolved
>> >after trying 3 or four different things, and then went this way
>> instead.
>> >While I can see a possible need for a 3-way variable, it seems we
>> >don't really need one here, at least not now, as all the eee.h files
>> >were empty anyway.
>> >
>> >I didn't file a defect, but the problem is that if you say
>> >
>> >#include OS_INCL
>> >
>> >in a source file, that should be either linux.h or openbsd.h, not
>> eee.h.
>> >Because OS_INCL was based on the makefile variable OS, in some
>> >directories it was 'eee', causing those source files to want to
>> >include eee.h. But they either actually needed either linux.h or
>> >openbsd.h, or neither. There were at least 3 places where we had a
>> >to include an empty eee.h file to make the code compile.  One of
>> >those was ssc-genlib, but I cleaned that up a few weeks ago.  That
>> >fix was not a general one, however, and was actually just a
>> >consequence of changing the way certain things worked in all that
>> >code.  OS was also being used to set default include directories,
>> >and those were correctly 'eee' in a small number of cases.
>> >
>> >The problem came along when I needed to port sm-seep to Linux, and
>> >including OS_INCL wouldn't work because that code is compiled with
>> >OS=3Deee.  Since I'd had the problem before, I decided it was time =
to
>> >implement a general fix.
>> >
>> >So it's not a black/white case, it's more like a grey area, but one
>> >that had to be resolved.
>> >
>> >I didn't mean to ruffle any feathers, just trying to keep things
>> >light. By abusing everyone.  Because that's so humourous.  Abusing
>> >variables is bad, abusing people is OK as long as it's not me.
>> >
>> >
>> >> >-----Original Message-----
>> >> >From: Andy Sharp
>> >> >Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 2:13 PM
>> >> >To: Larry Scheer; Maxim Kozlovsky
>> >> >Subject: please review 27937
>> >> >
>> >> >I'm sending this to both of you because it involves makefiles
>> >> >and/or code you may have written or know about.  Yes, I am a bit
>> >> >nervous about it.  It builds on both cougar and bobcat/openbsd,
>> >> >but...
>> >> >
>> >> >Change 27937 by andys@ripper on 2008/02/19 14:20:57 *pending*
>> >> >
>> >> >        Ai-eee.
>> >> >        Fix abuse of OS make variable.  This variable is limited
>> >> >        to the two SSC operating systems, either openbsd or
linux.
>> >> >        eee is not one of those.  Really this variable should
have
>> >> >        been called SSC_OS or something, but that's probably
>> >> >        already used for something completely different.
>> >> >
>> >> >        reviewed by
>> >> >
>> >> >Affected files ...
>> >> >
>> >> >... //depot/dev/nfx-tree/Includes/eee/ipm-if.h#1 delete
>> >> >... //depot/dev/nfx-tree/Tools/defs.mk#11 edit
>> >> >... //depot/dev/nfx-tree/code/sm-elog/eee.h#1 delete
>> >> >... //depot/dev/nfx-tree/code/sm-ipmd-lib/eee.h#1 delete
