On Sat, Aug 1, 2015 at 12:06 AM, Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org wrote:
Hi Chris,
On 30 July 2015 at 23:34, Chris Packham judge.packham@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Simon,
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 7:47 AM, Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org wrote:
Commit 488d19c (patman: add distutils based installer) has the side effect of making patman run twice with each invocation. Fix this by checking for 'main program' invocation in patman.py. This is good practice in any case.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org
Reviewed-by: Chris Packham judge.packham@gmail.com
I did (kind of) think about that at the time when I had to handle the in-tree vs out-of-tree usage. One solution would have been to move most of the code to a module ("patch-manager" say) and have the patman script import that. The same would work for anything else that wanted to bring in bits of patman (buildman perhaps?).
Ah OK. We could do this, but what is the benefit? Buildman currently imports the particular modules it needs and doesn't use the top-level tool.
That may play into the de-coupling of u-boot and patman. Some of these common bits could be yet another re-usable component that both patman and buildman use. But then you'd have to come up with a name for such a component which we all know is a NP-hard problem :).
I haven't really looked at buildman and only have a vague understanding of what it does. Do you think it too would be useful outside of u-boot?
[snip]
Regards, Simon