Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] kyle code purge progress from sorcery

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Eric Sandall <eric AT sandall.us>
  • To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] kyle code purge progress from sorcery
  • Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2005 09:13:43 -0700

Quoting Seth Alan Woolley <seth AT positivism.org>:

Since March 2002, we've come a long way in coding sorcery. I've run
ESR's comparator against the old Kyle Codebase since when Anders first
committed the sorcery code to perforce from version 0.1.1

http://smgl.positivism.org:8080/files/sorcery.compare.txt

As you can see we have:

1) some config file holdovers (a list of variables, not copyrightable)

2) dialogrc (not copyrightable)

3) README is the same (could be rewritten)

4) mirrors are the same (not copyrightable, database again)

5) some argument handling code vestiges (very minor)

6) documentation similarity

7) some small snippets from the build api

8) some snippets of the OLDLIBS handling during dispel

9) some rarely used commands in gaze (snapshot handling and gaze installed)

10) almost all of cabal

11) vcast

12) much of the sorcery dialog front end interface and some functions:
show_files, add_pkgs, file_list, remove_pkgs, grep_install_logs,
goodbye, background_execute

13) parts of libdownload and url_http (undergoing rewrite now)

14) /etc/pam.d handling

15) modified by SA backup and not-reaping logic

16) the color on/off logic

17) report printing

18) remnants of early FUZZ support

19) more snippets of OLDLIBS handling

20) small snippets from libsorcery

21) part of the sustained list (not copyrightable)

94% of the code in current sorcery is totally new as you can see by the
numbers in the url above.

I wonder if somebody could rewrite cabal from scratch, that's pretty
much the only thing of size untouched. We could move that into its own
spell, too.

You mean Sorcery module, not spell, right?

Not that I'm against this, but is there a problem with the GPL'd code we
have?

-sandalle

--
Eric Sandall | Source Mage GNU/Linux Developer
eric at sandall.us PGP: 0xA8EFDD61 | http://www.sourcemage.org/
http://eric.sandall.us/ | SysAdmin @ Inst. Shock Physics @
WSU
http://counter.li.org/ #196285 | http://www.shock.wsu.edu/

----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page