[GSoC 2020]: Need help in writing sed alternative in Python for RSB recipes

[Chris Johns]

On 16/8/20 8:29 am, Mritunjay Sharma wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 16, 2020 at 12:15 AM Gedare Bloom <gedare at rtems.org
> <mailto:gedare at rtems.org>> wrote:
> 
>     Hi Mritunjay, Chris:
> 
>     For the RSB, since it is user-facing, we need to be sure to minimize
>     its dependencies on the user environment and platform. So this pycli
>     can only be used if it is distributed standard with Python 2 and
>     Python 3.
> 
>     Would someone be able to apply this patch and use it to build epics?
>     No, because (1) they won't have pycli available, and (2) they don't
>     have a path /home/mritunjay
> 
> 
> I think what you are saying is absolutely right. It will be really a great help
> if Chris can guide on what next can be done. 

See below.

> As far as 'pycli' is concerned, I have made a couple of minor tweaks. Gave it a
> better name 'sedpy' and made it public on GitHub. 
> 
> Please find the link to the
> project here: https://github.com/mritunjaysharma394/sedpy

Thanks but I currently do not see a need for this tool.

> I will appreciate if mentors can have a look and try this and see if it in any
> way can be modified
> to be used with RSB or else we will go with what is suggested. 

Please put the RSB to one side. I will let you know when we can return to it.

I believe patching config files in EPCIS from the RSB is fragile. EPICS should
be free to change any of these files without needing to considering the effect
it has on the RSB. Just because we can peek inside does not means we are free to
exploit what we see.

What happens if you define the needed variables on the make command line? For
example:

 gmake RTEMS_BASE=$HOME/development/rtems/5 RTEMS_VERSION=5.1-rc2

These variables are just normal make ones and so they can be overridden from the
command line.

Please investigate this and see what happens?

Chris