| Summary: | ASTERISK-05611: [post-1.2] unused code | ||
| Reporter: | Luigi Rizzo (rizzo) | Labels: | |
| Date Opened: | 2005-11-15 10:23:19.000-0600 | Date Closed: | 2005-12-23 16:43:37.000-0600 |
| Priority: | Minor | Regression? | No |
| Status: | Closed/Complete | Components: | Core/General |
| Versions: | Frequency of Occurrence | ||
| Related Issues: | |||
| Environment: | Attachments: | ||
| Description: | app_datetime.c is not used anymore, Datetime() is implemented now by app_sayunixtime.c i suggest to cvs delete the code, and also remove the two lines below from apps/Makefile rm -f $(DESTDIR)$(MODULES_DIR)/app_datetime.so rm -f $(DESTDIR)$(MODULES_DIR)/app_qcall.so | ||
| Comments: | By: Tilghman Lesher (tilghman) 2005-11-15 12:21:26.000-0600 We break upgrade paths by removing the 'rm -f' lines. By: twisted (twisted) 2005-11-15 12:44:02.000-0600 Also, if you notice, SayUnixTime() and DateTime() are two different functions, both of which say the date and time differently. If you'd like to provide a patch to remove DateTime() from app_datetime.c and put it into app_sayunixtime.c, that would be a better avenue. By: Luigi Rizzo (rizzo) 2005-11-15 14:51:05.000-0600 corydon: now i understand the motivation for the 'rm -f' lines. I don't care whether or not we keep them. I just want to comment that the approach in the top level Makefile (see oldmodcheck:) that warns for old modules is a lot more sound because it gives you on possible issues, while at the same time not requiring every module that ever existed to have a matching 'rm' line in a Makefile, or deleting things that you might want to keep. By: Luigi Rizzo (rizzo) 2005-11-15 14:58:19.000-0600 twisted: i don't know if they are meant to be different. If you look at the _code_ as it is now in HEAD, they are both implemented in app_sayunixtime.c as aliases of the same C function, and app_datetime.c is unlinked from the compilation. If you look at the _description_ in the two source files, sayunixtime() is just a more flexible version of datetime(), but their default behaviour is described as the same, so any difference in the output is a bug. Anyways, give me a spec and it is trivial to implement it as a format string. By: Tilghman Lesher (tilghman) 2005-12-23 16:43:23.000-0600 Committed to trunk, with mods. | ||