[omniORB-dev] Patches for IDL stub generation

[Thomas Lockhart]

(Consolidating this discussion on the -dev list)

Re: location of CosNaming and other stub files

OK, I can put CosNaming up at the top as it is currently. Do you have a 
preference on the style of generation?

I would like to also put it down lower in omniORB/COS for completeness, 
and include a .pth file up above to make them visible (unless otherwise 
indicated by then answer to the next question)...

Does the python standard for CORBA specify the visibility for interfaces 
other than CosNaming?

>>Note that the patch file mentions several files which are no longer 
>>needed afaict: python/CosNaming* (now generated automatically, but in a 
>>different style than before; is that OK Duncan?),
> Yes, although see my comment in my other mail that I think CosNaming
> should still be installed in the place it always used to be.
>>   and acinclude.m4 (is this needed by pre-2.53 autoconf??).
> acinclude.m4 is required. It is one of the inputs to aclocal that
> generates aclocal.m4.

Hmm. When I rename it aside autoconf stays happy. Oh well...

>>btw, many of the "patches" are for files generated by ./configure but 
>>which are included in the distro anyway. The actual necessary patches 
>>are quite small.
> The files in the distribution that you have patched are used in the
> case that autoconf is not being used. They are important, and need to
> remain the way they were!

Fine with me :)

Is it OK to send you patches on everything and have you decide which 
files should stay the same, or should I somehow weed out the ones which 
autoconf overwrites? There may be one or two which need to be 
hand-modified or generated by you in your standard environment to get 
changes to support the COS stubs.

Does your release schedule allow me to work on this over the weekend, or 
do you need patches before Monday?

                         - Tom