[llvm-commits] [llvm] r161765 - /llvm/trunk/tools/

[David Blaikie]

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 11:36 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 8:28 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 4:46 AM, Benjamin Kramer <benny.kra at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 13.08.2012, at 19:50, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Author: dblaikie
>>>> Date: Mon Aug 13 12:50:44 2012
>>>> New Revision: 161765
>>>>
>>>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=161765&view=rev
>>>> Log:
>>>> Ignore known externally-homed tools.
>>>>
>>>> Modified:
>>>>    llvm/trunk/tools/   (props changed)
>>>>
>>>> Propchange: llvm/trunk/tools/
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> --- svn:ignore (added)
>>>> +++ svn:ignore Mon Aug 13 12:50:44 2012
>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
>>>> +clang
>>>> +lld
>>>> +lldb
>>>
>>> Can you make sure that "make update" in the llvm root still picks up clang and updates all svn checkouts? It was the reason why the clang directory wasn't ignored.
>>
>> Ah, I didn't realize that machinery was powered by this particular
>> mechanism - thanks for pointing it out. A quick glance at the Makefile
>> seems to show that it still works that way & that I've probably broken
>> it. I'll try to find an alternate fix to it this morning.
>
> I believe I've fixed this is r161883 - it should work for both ignored
> directories (like clang) and unignored directories (like, presumably,
> 3rd party tools/projects that people have out-of-tree & don't have
> svn:ignore properties for)
>
> I might update this to work with git too at some point - but since I
> use git+cmake+ninja it's not directly relevant to me (& Chandler,
> keeper of the cmake build, doesn't much like the idea of the build
> system mutating the source tree)

While hacking on my own local script for updating git repositories I
realize something that might be relevant to others:

I believe clang-tools-extra is the first instance of a second level of
repository nesting in the llvm source tree. The current "make update"
functionality doesn't appear to recurse, so I assume this new repo
won't be updated by that target.

If anyone relies on it/feels like improving/fixing it for this new
scenario, feel free. Just thought I'd at least mention it so it was
less likely to catch someone by surprise.

- David