Re: [PATCH] xen/build: Fix `make cscope` rune

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 16.12.2021 15:58, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 16/12/2021 14:00, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 16.12.2021 10:20, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> Second, and this way for a long time:
>>>
>>>   $ make cscope
>>>   ( find arch/x86/include -name '*.h' -print; find include -name '*.h' 
>>> -print;
>>>   find xsm arch/x86 common drivers lib test -name '*.[chS]' -print ) >
>>>   cscope.files
>>>   cscope -k -b -q
>>>   cscope: cannot find file arch/x86/efi/efi.h
>>>   cscope: cannot find file arch/x86/efi/ebmalloc.c
>>>   cscope: cannot find file arch/x86/efi/compat.c
>>>   cscope: cannot find file arch/x86/efi/pe.c
>>>   cscope: cannot find file arch/x86/efi/boot.c
>>>   cscope: cannot find file arch/x86/efi/runtime.c
>>>
>>> This is caused by these being symlinks to common/efi.  Restrict all find 
>>> runes
>>> to `-type f` to skip symlinks, because common/efi/*.c are already listed.
>> I have reservations here, albeit of theoretical nature as long as only
>> the csope target is affected (simply because I don't use it): Make
>> rules should really be independent of a dir entry being a real file or
>> a symlink. I did run into problems with that already years ago when
>> the shim was introduced. My arrangements heavily use symlinking, and
>> any assumption on files being "real" ones will break this. At the very
>> least symlink checks should be restricted to cover only relative ones;
>> ideally one would distinguish ones staying within the tree vs ones
>> reaching to the "outside".
> 
> all_sources is used exclusively for "tags" purposes; the
> TAGS/tags/gtags/cscope targets.
> 
> Personally, I'd prefer there to not be symlinks in the first place.  The
> EFI logic is unnecessarily complicated to navigate.
> 
> But the reality is that inter-xen/ symlinks for source files are also a
> duplication as far as these `find` runes are concerned.

DYM intra-xen/ symlinks? Else I'm afraid I'm not following.

> Apparently tags et al will follow symlinks, while there's no obviously
> help online about cscope, other than "resolve your symlinks first".
> 
> In either case, you don't want to end up with both the regular path, and
> the symlink, ending up in the file list.
> 
> 
> I don't anticipate the usecase for all_source changing, nor the way we
> symlink things, so I think sticking with `-type f` is the appropriate
> action.

Well, as said - I disagree, but as long as only targets I don't care
about are affected, I guess I'll let you do what you want done.

> Furthermore, you really don't want a directory (e.g. include/foo.d )
> getting into the file list either.

I certainly agree with you here.

Jan