[SLOF] [PATCH 08/11] Do not link libnet to net-snk anymore

[Alexey Kardashevskiy]

On 14/09/16 19:18, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 14.09.2016 10:55, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>> On 10/09/16 05:52, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>> Since libnet is now linked to Paflof directly, we do not have to
>>> link it into net-snk anymore.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth at redhat.com>
>>> ---
>>>  clients/net-snk/Makefile     | 2 +-
>>>  clients/net-snk/app/Makefile | 2 +-
>>>  clients/net-snk/app/main.c   | 5 -----
>>>  lib/libnet/Makefile          | 3 +--
>>>  lib/libnet/netload.c         | 2 +-
>>>  5 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/clients/net-snk/Makefile b/clients/net-snk/Makefile
>>> index 1cab7ae..c0bb73a 100644
>>> --- a/clients/net-snk/Makefile
>>> +++ b/clients/net-snk/Makefile
>>> @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ include $(TOP)/make.rules
>>>  OBJS	=  kernel/kernel.o oflib/oflib.o libc/libc-glue.o app/app.o
>>>  .PHONY : subdirs clean depend mrproper
>>>  
>>> -CLIENTLIBS = $(LIBCMNDIR)/libelf.a $(LIBCMNDIR)/libnet.a $(LIBCMNDIR)/libc.a
>>> +CLIENTLIBS = $(LIBCMNDIR)/libelf.a $(LIBCMNDIR)/libc.a
>>>  
>>>  all:	.depend subdirs
>>>  	$(MAKE) client
>>> diff --git a/clients/net-snk/app/Makefile b/clients/net-snk/app/Makefile
>>> index 52d446c..2da02b9 100644
>>> --- a/clients/net-snk/app/Makefile
>>> +++ b/clients/net-snk/app/Makefile
>>> @@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ export TOP
>>>  endif
>>>  include $(TOP)/make.rules
>>>  
>>> -CFLAGS +=$(ADDCFLAGS) -I$(LIBCMNDIR)/libnet
>>> +CFLAGS +=$(ADDCFLAGS)
>>>  
>>>  OBJS = main.o
>>>  
>>> diff --git a/clients/net-snk/app/main.c b/clients/net-snk/app/main.c
>>> index 22aeba7..17c16b6 100644
>>> --- a/clients/net-snk/app/main.c
>>> +++ b/clients/net-snk/app/main.c
>>> @@ -13,7 +13,6 @@
>>>  #include <string.h>
>>>  #include <stdio.h>
>>>  #include <of.h>
>>> -#include <netapps.h>
>>>  #include <libbootmsg.h>
>>>  
>>>  #ifdef SNK_BIOSEMU_APPS
>>> @@ -31,10 +30,6 @@ main(int argc, char *argv[])
>>>  	int i;
>>>  	of_set_callback((void *) &_callback_entry);
>>>  
>>> -	if (strcmp(argv[0], "netboot") == 0 && argc >= 5)
>>> -		return netboot(argc, argv);
>>> -	if (strcmp(argv[0], "ping") == 0)
>>> -		return ping(argc, argv);
>>
>>
>> After this change we do not have working "ping" - it is added in the next
>> patch, not good for bisectability. Was this intentional?
> 
> Yes, it's ugly to lose bisectability for one step here, but since "ping"
> is IMHO not such an important command in SLOF, I decided that it is OK
> to break it for one commit: If we want to add the Forth-to-C wrapper for
> ping in libnet.code before this commit, I would need to write the
> wrapper in a similar fashion as I've done it for the netboot() wrapper
> in the previous patch, i.e. parse the string that has been created by
> the forth code with:
> 
>  s" ping " my-args $cat
> 
> ... and then pass argc and the created argv[] array to the ping() function.
> But since it's much easier for ping() to directly work with the my-args
> parameter, I wanted to avoid that step.


Well. Why did not you change netboot() the same way? :)

> 
> Now, if you insist on keeping the bisectability here, I can rework the
> patch series ... but be prepared that the ping patch will likely look a
> little bit uglier in that case ;-)

I do not insist as much on this sort of bisectability, it is just weird to
see supposedly equal (from coding style and calling convention prospective)
ping() and netboot() having different prototypes (and forth wrappers).

Meanwhile I've pushed 1..6 to github.


-- 
Alexey