On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 03:19:37PM +0800, Daniel Veillard wrote:
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 05:31:54PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 05/13/2011 07:36 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > The hvsupport.html.in file is constantly out of date, because when
> > updating the drivers to add new APIs, people often (always) forget
> > to update the hvsupport.html.in file.
> >
> > To solve this we can instead store version number annotations in
> > the drivers themselves, so it is not easily missed. Then the
> > hvsupport.html.in file can be auto-generated
>
> I love the idea! But I ran out of time to finish reviewing it today.
> Did you test VPATH builds? (autogen.sh will help). Did you test 'make
> distcheck' to ensure the tarball is complete?
I like the idea too, except for the perl part, does it make it
mandatory to have perl to build now (the remote generator may have
pushed that dependancy already though).
Perl is already mandatory for people building from GIT, so this
doesn't change that requirement at all.
I would actually put patch 4 first since it's a no-op and then
patch
3 since it depends on 4 for the genration (but it's a detail).
Yep, I've reordered this.
Checking the full patch 4 seems hard did you just diff the current
version and generated one (I would guess so) ? If yes ACK from me after
checking builds as Eric suggests,
The current generated one is too incomplete to be useful for comparison.
I've basically worked on each driver in turn. Starting with APIs present
when the driver was introduced, then viewing a git diff between subsequent
releases tags, to identify what APIs were added in each release.
Regards,
Daniel
--
|:
http://berrange.com -o-
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|:
http://libvirt.org -o-
http://virt-manager.org :|
|:
http://autobuild.org -o-
http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|:
http://entangle-photo.org -o-
http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|