Operator Precedence and Patches.

[Tony van der Hoff]

On 7 Mar 2002, in message <200203071102.LAA08040 at inputplus.demon.co.uk>,
you wrote:

> 
> OK, I've done this and realised that the `source' ZIP files available
> for download aren't source in the GNU `make distclean' sense, i.e. they
> contain built elements that the normal punter can re-create, e.g.
> oslibsrc.6.32/!OSLib/Source/Core/oslib/s32;0.
> 
[snip]
> As you can see, this generates quite large diffs.  Do you store the
> mechanically-generated files under CVS?
> 
Yes, the .s* files are there to allow a developer to do convergence testing
on a new release. You can diff the ;0 version against the new version to make
certain you haven't done anything silly. If you're starting from scratch, you
can't recreate these for the previous version, so that's why they're
supplied, but in your case that won't matter.

The contents lists (Source/OSLib and source/OSLib32) are there to allow a
developer to compare the library contents of a new version with the previous
version; the need not be under CVS control.

I apologise for the dynamic dependency lists in the makefiles for the /test
hierarchy; that is simply an oversight on my part. I shall ensure they're
cleaned in future.  You may not wish to bother with the test hierarchy for
your repository. I don't understand why the other makefiles show large diffs.

In the /source hierarchy, the only non-derived files you need to put under
CVS control are the top-level files in each section (i.e. !Clean, !Make,
MakeFile, but probably not Pin, which is moribund) and the contents of the
/asm and /swi directories.

I have decided to generate a CVS repository using V6.00 as a baseline, so
give me time and it will appeaer! It will include the Tools and OSLibSupport
branches as well as the main OSLib Source.

-- 
Tony van der Hoff         | MailTo:tony at mk-net.demon.co.uk
                          | MailTo:avanderhoff at iee.org
Buckinghamshire, England  | http:www.mk-net.demon.co.uk