Patch to make link.sh output a bit less scary.

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
10 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Patch to make link.sh output a bit less scary.

Jeff Horelick
Hey, i've noticed some people saying on IRC and randomly throughout the web in places that the whole:

"link.sh: We don't need libXt!"
"link.sh: Removing libXt!"

thing is a bit scary if you're new to compiling vim or compiling stuff on linux in general because you might think its actually going to remove libxt from your whole system. Because of this, I have attached a very simple patch to change the link.sh echos to say delinking instead of removing which sounds quite a bit less scary.

Regards,
JD

--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php

link-nicer.sh.diff (2K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Patch to make link.sh output a bit less scary.

Tony Mechelynck
On 18/05/10 11:24, Jeff Horelick wrote:

> Hey, i've noticed some people saying on IRC and randomly throughout the
> web in places that the whole:
>
> "link.sh: We don't need libXt!"
> "link.sh: Removing libXt!"
>
> thing is a bit scary if you're new to compiling vim or compiling stuff
> on linux in general because you might think its actually going to remove
> libxt from your whole system. Because of this, I have attached a very
> simple patch to change the link.sh echos to say delinking instead of
> removing which sounds quite a bit less scary.
>
> Regards,
> JD
>
> --
> You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
> Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
> For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php

Now that you mention it, the word "remove" could be ambiguous (though
after "OK link works" I never thought that the "removal" could be other
than from the link command-line), but "delink" sounds barbarous to me.
What about (in pseudo-printf notation):

OK, linking works, let's try and simplify the command-line
Trying not to use the %s library
This Vim build doesn't need the %s library
This Vim build DOES need the %s library
Linked fine, the link command-line cannot be simplified
Using auto/link.sed to simplify the link command-line
Linked fine using some fewer libraries


?

Best regards,
Tony.
--
Simon's Law:
        Everything put together falls apart sooner or later.

--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Patch to make link.sh output a bit less scary.

Cesar Romani-2
In reply to this post by Jeff Horelick
On 18/05/2010 04:24 a.m., Jeff Horelick wrote:
 > Hey, i've noticed some people saying on IRC and randomly throughout the
 > web in places that the whole:
 >
 > "link.sh: We don't need libXt!"
 > "link.sh: Removing libXt!"
 >
 > thing is a bit scary if you're new to compiling vim or compiling stuff
 > on linux in general because you might think its actually going to remove
 > libxt from your whole system. Because of this, I have attached a very
 > simple patch to change the link.sh echos to say delinking instead of
 > removing which sounds quite a bit less scary.

I'd use unlinking instead of delinking.

Regards

--
Cesar

--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Patch to make link.sh output a bit less scary.

Dominique Pellé
Cesar Romani wrote:

> On 18/05/2010 04:24 a.m., Jeff Horelick wrote:
>> Hey, i've noticed some people saying on IRC and randomly throughout the
>> web in places that the whole:
>>
>> "link.sh: We don't need libXt!"
>> "link.sh: Removing libXt!"
>>
>> thing is a bit scary if you're new to compiling vim or compiling stuff
>> on linux in general because you might think its actually going to remove
>> libxt from your whole system. Because of this, I have attached a very
>> simple patch to change the link.sh echos to say delinking instead of
>> removing which sounds quite a bit less scary.
>
> I'd use unlinking instead of delinking.

How about this message instead:  "link.sh: Trying to link without libXt"

-- Dominique

--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Patch to make link.sh output a bit less scary.

Matt Wozniski-2
In reply to this post by Cesar Romani-2
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Cesar Romani wrote:

> On 18/05/2010 04:24 a.m., Jeff Horelick wrote:
>> Hey, i've noticed some people saying on IRC and randomly throughout the
>> web in places that the whole:
>>
>> "link.sh: We don't need libXt!"
>> "link.sh: Removing libXt!"
>>
>> thing is a bit scary if you're new to compiling vim or compiling stuff
>> on linux in general because you might think its actually going to remove
>> libxt from your whole system. Because of this, I have attached a very
>> simple patch to change the link.sh echos to say delinking instead of
>> removing which sounds quite a bit less scary.
>
> I'd use unlinking instead of delinking.

I'd say "Not linking in libXt" or "Removing libXt from libraries" or
"Going to link without libXt".

~Matt

--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Patch to make link.sh output a bit less scary.

Gary Johnson-4
On 2010-05-18, Matt Wozniski wrote:

> On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Cesar Romani wrote:
> > On 18/05/2010 04:24 a.m., Jeff Horelick wrote:
> >> Hey, i've noticed some people saying on IRC and randomly throughout the
> >> web in places that the whole:
> >>
> >> "link.sh: We don't need libXt!"
> >> "link.sh: Removing libXt!"
> >>
> >> thing is a bit scary if you're new to compiling vim or compiling stuff
> >> on linux in general because you might think its actually going to remove
> >> libxt from your whole system. Because of this, I have attached a very
> >> simple patch to change the link.sh echos to say delinking instead of
> >> removing which sounds quite a bit less scary.
> >
> > I'd use unlinking instead of delinking.
>
> I'd say "Not linking in libXt" or "Removing libXt from libraries" or
> "Going to link without libXt".

I was also going to suggest "not linking".  Definitely not
"unlinking".  Think about that.

Regards,
Gary

--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Patch to make link.sh output a bit less scary.

Charles Campbell
Gary Johnson wrote:

> On 2010-05-18, Matt Wozniski wrote:
>  
>> On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Cesar Romani wrote:
>>    
>>> On 18/05/2010 04:24 a.m., Jeff Horelick wrote:
>>>      
>>>> Hey, i've noticed some people saying on IRC and randomly throughout the
>>>> web in places that the whole:
>>>>
>>>> "link.sh: We don't need libXt!"
>>>> "link.sh: Removing libXt!"
>>>>
>>>> thing is a bit scary if you're new to compiling vim or compiling stuff
>>>> on linux in general because you might think its actually going to remove
>>>> libxt from your whole system. Because of this, I have attached a very
>>>> simple patch to change the link.sh echos to say delinking instead of
>>>> removing which sounds quite a bit less scary.
>>>>        
>>> I'd use unlinking instead of delinking.
>>>      
>> I'd say "Not linking in libXt" or "Removing libXt from libraries" or
>> "Going to link without libXt".
>>    
>
> I was also going to suggest "not linking".  Definitely not
> "unlinking".  Think about that.
>  

How about   "link.sh: Vim doesn't need libXt, so you don't either!  Am
uninstalling it now ...  ... ... Done!  (just kidding!)"

:)

Regards,
Chip Campbell

--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Patch to make link.sh output a bit less scary.

Bram Moolenaar
In reply to this post by Jeff Horelick

Jeff Horelick wrote:

> Hey, i've noticed some people saying on IRC and randomly throughout
> the web in places that the whole:
>
> "link.sh: We don't need libXt!"
> "link.sh: Removing libXt!"
>
> thing is a bit scary if you're new to compiling vim or compiling stuff on
> linux in general because you might think its actually going to remove libxt
> from your whole system. Because of this, I have attached a very simple patch
> to change the link.sh echos to say delinking instead of removing which
> sounds quite a bit less scary.

Are these the same people that ask for a copy of the internet?

Anyway, using "omit" instead of "remove" is probably better.
I don't know what "delinking" is.

--
hundred-and-one symptoms of being an internet addict:
67. Your hard drive crashes. You haven't logged in for two hours.  You start
    to twitch. You pick up the phone and manually dial your ISP's access
    number. You try to hum to communicate with the modem.  You succeed.

 /// Bram Moolenaar -- [hidden email] -- http://www.Moolenaar.net   \\\
///        sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\
\\\        download, build and distribute -- http://www.A-A-P.org        ///
 \\\            help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org    ///

--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Patch to make link.sh output a bit less scary.

Jeff Horelick
On May 18, 4:29 pm, Bram Moolenaar <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Jeff Horelick wrote:
> > Hey, i've noticed some people saying on IRC and randomly throughout
> > the web in places that the whole:
>
> > "link.sh: We don't need libXt!"
> > "link.sh: Removing libXt!"
>
> > thing is a bit scary if you're new to compiling vim or compiling stuff on
> > linux in general because you might think its actually going to remove libxt
> > from your whole system. Because of this, I have attached a very simple patch
> > to change the link.sh echos to say delinking instead of removing which
> > sounds quite a bit less scary.
>
> Are these the same people that ask for a copy of the internet?
>
> Anyway, using "omit" instead of "remove" is probably better.
> I don't know what "delinking" is.
>
> --
> hundred-and-one symptoms of being an internet addict:
> 67. Your hard drive crashes. You haven't logged in for two hours.  You start
>     to twitch. You pick up the phone and manually dial your ISP's access
>     number. You try to hum to communicate with the modem.  You succeed.
>
>  /// Bram Moolenaar -- [hidden email] --http://www.Moolenaar.net  \\\
> ///        sponsor Vim, vote for features --http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/\\\
> \\\        download, build and distribute --http://www.A-A-P.org       ///
>  \\\            help me help AIDS victims --http://ICCF-Holland.org   ///
>
> --
> You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
> Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
> For more information, visithttp://www.vim.org/maillist.php


They're also likely the type of people who own the Brooklyn Bridge
(does that "joke" work outside the US?).

Omit sounds quite good to me. I used delinking because I was sort of
under the impression that it built Vim linking to all these libraries
and then link.sh stripped them out, but i could be wrong.

--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Patch to make link.sh output a bit less scary.

Tony Mechelynck
On 18/05/10 22:42, JD wrote:
[...]
> They're also likely the type of people who own the Brooklyn Bridge
> (does that "joke" work outside the US?).

I'm Belgian, and I've met it before, so maybe it does.

>
> Omit sounds quite good to me. I used delinking because I was sort of
> under the impression that it built Vim linking to all these libraries
> and then link.sh stripped them out, but i could be wrong.
>

that's what it does (removing them one at a time from the link
command-line then trying to repeat the link without them) but the main
objection about "delinking" was that the word isn't known. "Linking
without", "not using", "omitting" (i.e. omitting from the link) etc. all
are known English terms which any Vim developer from all over the world
would be supposed to understand.


Best regards,
Tony.
--
Q:  How much money do you give to a 900 foot Jesus?
A:  As much as he wants.

--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php