|
Description
Paulo César Pereira de Andrade
2007-11-03 23:09:46 UTC
Created attachment 12341 [details] [review] xedit patch Created attachment 12342 [details] [review] Ignore xedit.patch use only xedit-1.patch Sunday I made another patch that I should apply on Mandriva packages, removing all other Mandriva patches soon. I used the default autotools CFLAGS in xedit-1.patch, but when compiling with -Wall there is a lot of warnings, so I changed one structure field from "unsigned char *" to "char *" to remove 95% of the warnings, and also fixed a few problems where the conversion of "char *" to "struct _hash_key *" was not properly updated and a pointer to structure was being passed to a printf "%s" argument in case of errors. Note that this patch isn't incompatible with the xprint support, just that it disables it by default, and it isn't a runtime option (but could also be changed to it, if there is interest). I may write a patch to "make xprint happy" if there is interest, but that could require a very large amount of work. Could be interesting to print sources with syntax hightlight and the like. Unless I modify the tags code to handle multiple tags (I am considering this to make navigating in different projects easier), i.e. building a tree of tag structures and associating a tags file with the file being edited, and choosing/searching the topmost tags file when opening a new file, this should be my last patch for xedit for a long time. Created attachment 12370 [details] [review] fix ispell interface, defaults to noxprint to reenable syntax hightlight, regex, etc, several bugs and add tags interface Created attachment 12595 [details]
Latest patch version. Single file. Obsoletes previous posted patches in this bug report.
This is a single patch, that obsoletes previous patches. Sorry, I did not obsolete others when starting posting patches... This patch has several updates
to the Mandriva Cooker xedit version, that should be also updated soon.
Minor changelog is:
o Update README, COPYING, ChangeLog, etc
o Update ispell interface, should work on multi byte and single byte locales,
for single byte this is basically an "english" spell checker, as xedit
doesn't properly handle utf8 in non multibyte mode. Not sure if it is worth
working on it.
o Added mouse wheel actions for scrolling the text window
o Default to no-xprint support. This is another thing that I am not sure if is
worth fixing.
o Check all calls to XeditPrintf (the original version wasn't a printf_format)
function, and Xorg conversion to such raised some problems, as the code would
"sprintf" a string argument, that could have printf special characters, like
filenames with % and * character, and such.
o Minor fix to filenamewindow that would not update the horizontal scroll when
the text value were changed with XtSetValues. This probably should be fixed
in Xaw.
o Fixed an issue when replacing ~username where it would hold a pointer to a
substring, but then realloc the base pointer, what could cause random
crashes.
o Fixed assumption that '.' and '..' are the first two directory entries.
o Add a generic hash table to replace all other hash table implementations
inside xedit.
o Fixed problem in the line-edit-mode that would not properly match patterns
in the last line of a file due to buggy check for files ending with newline.
o Some other minor fixes to line-edit-mode like wrong substitution for
escaped characters.
o Added a tags interface. This should work properly with 'exuberant-ctags'
(default on Linux distros), when run as "ctags -R". When loading a new
file, the interface descends from the file directory up to the root
directory searching for a tags file. When searching the definition of a
symbol, it first tries the "best" match tags that is already associated
with the current buffer, and if failing, tries all other loaded tags, in
no specific order; this allows for example, finding library definitions
from sources a different project.
I am considering a different approach for it, as for example, Linux kernel
2.6.x has an almost 80Mb tags file, and xedit uses almost 100Mb to store
the tags information, and takes significant time to load. A better way
would be to have something like a binary tags file that would allow a very
fast lookup algorithm to be used, so that memory usage would be minimal, and
symbol defintion searches would be quite faster. Could also be extended to
not only find the symbol definition, but also search other uses of the symbol.
Maybe gnu global could be the proper application to handle it.
o The XeditPrintf (that prints text to the messagewidget) now also checks for
repeated messages, and like gnu emacs, prints the ammount of times is has
repeated.
o Manpage documentation of new resources tagsName (String) and loadTags
(Boolean)
Created attachment 14280 [details]
Latest version. Obsoletes previous posted patches.
git-format-patch from a branch where patches were rebuilt
to address an issue at a time, instead of a single big blob.
Please git-am to xorg/app/xedit
Take special attention to patch 14 as it adds two GPL
licensed files, but the entire patch can be skiped
without problems.
Would you like to be xedit maintainer? I don't think anyone else has as much interest in it as you seem to. Surely I want to be the xedit maintainer :-) My major interest is just to have it functional, as I wrote most of it's code. (In reply to comment #6) > Take special attention to patch 14 as it adds two GPL > licensed files, but the entire patch can be skiped > without problems. > i'm not quite sure i see the point of changing the license for two trivial files. can you clarify why they're not under the same license as the rest of xedit? (In reply to comment #9) > (In reply to comment #6) > > Take special attention to patch 14 as it adds two GPL > > licensed files, but the entire patch can be skiped > > without problems. > > > i'm not quite sure i see the point of changing the license for two trivial > files. can you clarify why they're not under the same license as the rest of > xedit? All code I contributed to XFree86 I either did not change any copyrights on existing files or used XFree86 license on new files. I added two new files with a BSD license and copyright to myself. The new files are not mandatory, so I used the GPL license. Actually, I wrote the perl mode to edit the "xorg-scripts" I posted some days ago in the xorg mailing list, and the "auto" mode for syntax highlight when editing configure.ac. The tags interface is also useful to work with the several different xorg git repositories, and very useful when used with the xorg-scripts/xorg-symbols.pl script. I could use some other editor that already has tags or a "perl" mode, but I use only xedit, unless I am distracted and type vi in a xterm :-) (In reply to comment #10) > (In reply to comment #9) > > (In reply to comment #6) > > All code I contributed to XFree86 I either did not change any copyrights > on existing files or used XFree86 license on new files. > > I added two new files with a BSD license and copyright to myself. > > The new files are not mandatory, so I used the GPL license. I don't understand why you would choose a different license for this change. I do know the benefits of GPL versus BSD, but in this case it seems trying to force xedit to become GPL. Is it really worth essentially forking xedit over these changes? (In reply to comment #11) > (In reply to comment #10) > > (In reply to comment #9) > > > (In reply to comment #6) > > > > All code I contributed to XFree86 I either did not change any copyrights > > on existing files or used XFree86 license on new files. > > > > I added two new files with a BSD license and copyright to myself. > > > > The new files are not mandatory, so I used the GPL license. > > I don't understand why you would choose a different license for this change. I > do know the benefits of GPL versus BSD, but in this case it seems trying to > force xedit to become GPL. > Is it really worth essentially forking xedit over these changes? Sorry, I am really not trying to gratuitously complicate things. The files I changed license were written long after (well more than one month :-) I posted the first patch here, but one could do something like 'git-am `ls 00* | grep -v 0014`' (or grep -v GPL) I am not a lawyer, neither never really stopped for too much time to try to understand about licensing/copyright issues. If this is really an issue I can change the license of those files. It is just that for quite some time almost all code I write in my free time I license it under GPL, but add the copyright to myself (at least until I have something worth, and contact FSF to assign copyright). I just want any possible derivate work to have source code available. But I don't plan to do any major work on xedit, so I am fine on ensuring any new code uses a BSD like license. Created attachment 14294 [details] [review] 0016-Fix-an-incorrect-buffer-size-calculation-and-allocat.patch This patch complements patches in xedit-patches.tar.bz2 The bug this patches fixes isn't really easy to trigger (needs consecutive writes larger than pagesize to a string buffer), but is a plain oversight and wrong code. (In reply to comment #12) > I am not a lawyer, neither never really stopped for too much time to > try to understand about licensing/copyright issues. If this is really an > issue I can change the license of those files. Essentially it comes down that if you put these changes in, xedit is automatically GPL. That's how I understand it anyway. > It is just that for quite some time almost all code I write in my free > time I license it under GPL, but add the copyright to myself (at least > until I have something worth, and contact FSF to assign copyright). > I just want any possible derivate work to have source code available If you are the only author you can just relicense your patches before applying them. > But I don't plan to do any major work on xedit, so I am fine on ensuring > any new code uses a BSD like license. I understand the reasons why you would start new code in GPL. When working on an existing project, it is usually beneficial and a sign of respect to the original authors to retain their choice of license. Of course, this isn't a black and white decision, but unless you plan to really revamp the app I wouldn't recommend a change in the license. Of course, all this for this project only. (In reply to comment #14) > If you are the only author you can just relicense your patches before applying > them. I wrote over 95% of the current code. And I was careful to avoid changing the original code (that dates back to 1987), and was basically a front end to the Xaw text widget. > > But I don't plan to do any major work on xedit, so I am fine on ensuring > > any new code uses a BSD like license. > > I understand the reasons why you would start new code in GPL. When working on > an existing project, it is usually beneficial and a sign of respect to the > original authors to retain their choice of license. I posted a reduced version of this patch in 2004, since then, when using some system with Xorg, I would just recompile xedit. > Of course, this isn't a black and white decision, but unless you plan to really > revamp the app I wouldn't recommend a change in the license. It would be better to write a new editor from scratch :-) > Of course, all this for this project only. Created attachment 14302 [details] [review] 0014-Add-perl-and-auto-tools-modes.patch Replaces 0014-GPL-licensed-perl-and-auto-tools-modes.patch in the xedit-patches.tar.bz2 file, adding new files with a standard BSD like license. Created attachment 15046 [details]
xedit-patches.tar.bz2
Latest version of patches.
This patch obsoletes all the previous ones.
It also fixes a problem where, when spliting in commits
that address one issue per patch, one of the patches had
been overwritten.
Also add a new patch to allow multiple make jobs, not
really important for a small package, mainly to avoid
xedit requiring some special rule where something like
"make -j 16" is the default.
Created attachment 15077 [details]
xedit-patches.tar.bz2
Err, when making a single tarball to store all patches,
I also tried to be smart and edited patches to remove
spaces errors, i.e. do something like 's@\s+$@@' and then:
$ git-apply <patch.file>
$ git-commit -a
<cut&past of commit message in previous patch>
but I forgot that git-apply doesn't automatically add new
files, and only noticed the problem when making a checkout
of my "patches" branch elsewhere and trying to rebuild.
Fixed adding new files now, and git-am should not report
space errors (i.e. new lines with spaces before eol).
Created attachment 15217 [details] [review] 0018-Compile-warning-fixes.patch Add parenthesis around a test where after macro expansion it looked like boolexpr==boolres==boolres. "Ansifiy" a function without arguments. This patch should work if applied in any order, but for better results, use it after the patches attachment #15077 [details]. Created attachment 15851 [details]
xedit-patches.tar.bz2
Latest version of patches. Should be ready to git-am,
git-apply or simply patch.
The change from the previous tarball is that is adds
patch 18 to it, and the new patch19 that is a python
mode, with syntax highlight and automatic indentation.
Created attachment 16468 [details] [review] 0020-Warn-if-a-newer-version-of-a-file-exists-before-over.patch Print a warning and request a second click to overwrite a file if a newer version exists. This patch complents the patches in the tarball. Created attachment 16469 [details] [review] 0021-Fix-an-off-by-one-error-check-that-can-lead-to-an-in.patch Fix an off by one error check that can lead to an infinite loop. This can happen when using the line edit mode to search&replace regexes. This patch complents the patches in the tarball. Patches have been commited. |
Use of freedesktop.org services, including Bugzilla, is subject to our Code of Conduct. How we collect and use information is described in our Privacy Policy.