Simplify component xml generation using sed

Simplify component xml generation using sed


BUG=none

Committed: 69b4894

[Daiki Ueno, 2013-03-02 00:57:39]

I guess shell eval is used here because '${libexecdir}' is expanded to
'${prefix}/libexec', right?  In that case, '$(libexecdir)' can be used instead,
as autoconf manual suggests:
http://www.gnu.org/savannah-checkouts/gnu/autoconf/manual/autoconf-2.69/html_...

This also makes all xml.in and xml.in.in well-formed XML.  One drawback is that
we can't use '@libexecdir@' in xml.in.in, since it is substituted at configure
time (the patch uses '@LIBEXECDIR@' instead).

[Peng, 2013-03-02 01:21:52]

On 2013/03/02 00:57:39, Daiki Ueno wrote:
> I guess shell eval is used here because '${libexecdir}' is expanded to
> '${prefix}/libexec', right?  In that case, '$(libexecdir)' can be used
instead,
> as autoconf manual suggests:
>
http://www.gnu.org/savannah-checkouts/gnu/autoconf/manual/autoconf-2.69/html_...
> 
> This also makes all xml.in and xml.in.in well-formed XML.  One drawback is
that
> we can't use '@libexecdir@' in xml.in.in, since it is substituted at configure
> time (the patch uses '@LIBEXECDIR@' instead).

Is it possible remove xxx.xml.in.in, just use xxx.xml.in ?

[Daiki Ueno, 2013-03-02 04:41:51]

On 2013/03/02 01:21:52, Peng wrote:
> > This also makes all xml.in and xml.in.in well-formed XML.  One drawback is
> that
> > we can't use '@libexecdir@' in xml.in.in, since it is substituted at
configure
> > time (the patch uses '@LIBEXECDIR@' instead).
> 
> Is it possible remove xxx.xml.in.in, just use xxx.xml.in ?

Right, modified the CL to just use xxx.xml.in.

[Daiki Ueno, 2013-03-09 23:20:57]

On 2013/03/02 04:41:51, Daiki Ueno wrote:
> On 2013/03/02 01:21:52, Peng wrote:
> > > This also makes all xml.in and xml.in.in well-formed XML.  One drawback is
> > that
> > > we can't use '@libexecdir@' in xml.in.in, since it is substituted at
> configure
> > > time (the patch uses '@LIBEXECDIR@' instead).
> > 
> > Is it possible remove xxx.xml.in.in, just use xxx.xml.in ?
> 
> Right, modified the CL to just use xxx.xml.in.

Not sure xxx.xml.in.in files are marked as "M" not "D" on Rietveld, but they are
actually removed.

[Peng, 2013-03-09 23:41:13]

On 2013/03/09 23:20:57, Daiki Ueno wrote:
> On 2013/03/02 04:41:51, Daiki Ueno wrote:
> > On 2013/03/02 01:21:52, Peng wrote:
> > > > This also makes all xml.in and xml.in.in well-formed XML.  One drawback
is
> > > that
> > > > we can't use '@libexecdir@' in xml.in.in, since it is substituted at
> > configure
> > > > time (the patch uses '@LIBEXECDIR@' instead).
> > > 
> > > Is it possible remove xxx.xml.in.in, just use xxx.xml.in ?
> > 
> > Right, modified the CL to just use xxx.xml.in.
> 
> Not sure xxx.xml.in.in files are marked as "M" not "D" on Rietveld, but they
are
> actually removed.

lgtm.

[Daiki Ueno, 2013-03-10 05:55:51]

Committed patchset #2 manually as r69b4894 (presubmit successful).