octave-maintainers
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: eliminating start-up message for non-interactive sessions


From: Daniel J Sebald
Subject: Re: eliminating start-up message for non-interactive sessions
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 13:23:34 -0600
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.24) Gecko/20111108 Fedora/3.1.16-1.fc14 Thunderbird/3.1.16

On 01/22/2015 10:48 AM, John W. Eaton wrote:
On 01/21/2015 04:49 PM, Daniel J Sebald wrote:

The warranty got me to wondering. Maybe it would be convenient to have
a "make warranty" which runs a simple program that searches the source
tree making sure that each file has a warranty notice, and matches that
of some canonical warranty in the source tree somewhere. One could
change the canonical version of the warranty, then run "make warranty"
and all files would have, for example YYYY-2013 changed to YYYY-2015. It
could be a C program compiled with "make" or even an Octave script used
after Octave is compiled. So, if the warranty is to change with a new
year or whatever, change the canonical version, run "make warranty", and
then all the file changes will show up in Mercurial before committing
the changes.

Take a look at the build-aux/update-copyright script that is part of
gnulib. It might require some modification to work with Octave's
copyright notices, but it would be a good starting point.

Gnulib also provides some other tools for keeping things consistent in
source files. Take a look at the top-level Makefile and top/maint.mk
files in the gnulib sources. I have no objection to using similar things
for Octave.

OK. I see top/maint.mk in the source tree. It uses grep to find all occurrences of "Copyright". There also seems to be use of "git" in a command-like fashion. With just the portion of gnulib in Octave, "make update-copyright" fails, complaining about gnulib not being a valid git repository. Probably need to download the whole gnulib repository to try this out. Nonetheless, that's the right idea.

Dan



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]