[syslinux] Comments WAS: Refactor checksize.pl

[Celelibi]

2015-11-20 8:15 UTC+01:00, Ady via Syslinux <syslinux at zytor.com>:
>> >
>> > I don't like the idea of changing "UI" (e.g. command line options that
>> > might be used by some users) without very well-thought reasoning.
>>
>> This is not an UI. AFAIK, this script is not shipped to the user. I
>> don't even see what a user could do with it.
>>
>>
>
> Well, the Perl script _is_ shipped in the official release

My bad. I only checked the debian packages, none of them include a
file named checksize.pl.
I just checked the official release, it actually include the whole
source tree. Does that mean we can't change any argument of the shell
or perl scripts or any target of the Makefiles?
Of course not.

>
>> >
>> > In the particular case of "padsize" vs. "maxsize" (options / parameters
>> > of the Perl script), there used to be a separate use of them. Although
>> > there _seems_ to be no use for having both of them simultaneously at
>> > this time _for a normal build of Syslinux_, we cannot discard /
>> > disregard the possibility that some script in some distro might want to
>> > take advantage of each of them independently, especially for some
>> > debugging situation (e.g. some buggy / old BIOS).
>> >
>> > Another potential (hypothetical) use-case might be some "bootable USB
>> > tool" making use of some/many/all parts of the Syslinux code. Let's not
>> > forget that some distros are still using older versions of Syslinux
>> > (even v. 3.xx), and (unnecessarily) changing command line options makes
>> > the updates (unnecessarily) more difficult, generally speaking.
>>
>> Keeping some legacy in the compilation chain for a potential usage
>> we're not even aware about seems a bit insane. If someone play with
>> the syslinux's internal compilation process, he is probably aware that
>> it may change completely on every single commit. We just do not
>> support this usage.
>>
>
> The example I gave (moving the location of binary files) could also be
> included in such category;
No.
I specified "in the compilation chain". Because this script is only
this: one tool used to build the binaries. Same would go for the
following files:
- efi/wrapper.c
- lzo/prepcore.c
- core/lstadjust.pl
- utils/bin2hex.pl
- **/*.pl

They're all just some custom tools when a single shell line in the
Makefiles would be too clumsy.



Best regards,
Celelibi