Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Normalize platform.txt pattern numbers #7752

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 10, 2020
Merged

Conversation

earlephilhower
Copy link
Collaborator

Some tools have issues with pattern.XX numbers above 9 in platform.txt.
Adjust all pattern.XX numbering to start at 1 and remove the numbering
when there is only one step.

Some tools have issues with pattern.XX numbers above 9 in platform.txt.
Adjust all pattern.XX numbering to start at 1 and remove the numbering
when there is only one step.
Copy link
Collaborator

@d-a-v d-a-v left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

👍
(someone should be working on a graphical diff understanding when lines are swapped)

@d-a-v d-a-v merged commit eaaa1db into esp8266:master Dec 10, 2020
@mhightower83
Copy link
Contributor

@earlephilhower Which tool has a problem with double digits? I know there is this issue described in Platform specification, Recipes to compile source code

Warning: hooks recipes are sorted before execution. If you need to write more than 10 recipes for a single hook, pad the number with a zero, for example:

My solution was to sidestep the problem and always use two digits in case the list grew

@earlephilhower earlephilhower deleted the platfix branch December 10, 2020 19:14
@earlephilhower
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@mhightower83 Sloeber(sp?), the Eclipse plugin, has an issue according to @hreintke in the MDNS gitter channel.

If we have more than 9 steps in a recipe we'll have to re-examine things (at that point a single Python script may be the sanest thing since Python3 is available on all platforms now). For now, we're far enough from the limit not to worry...

@jantje
Copy link

jantje commented Dec 10, 2020

The problem in Sloeber is that sloeber assumes that the numbers starts at 1 and are consecutive.
Here the number starts from 11 so sloeber assumes nu hooks are provided

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants