> > Why don't you post the functions here so that we can have a look? 
> Here is (1) my promisified HTTP request function and (2) a function that uses the returned promises to build an asynchronous, sequential chain of requests to Midas.
> 
> In addition to promisifying HTTP requests to Midas, I wanted the Promise.resolve from this function to always return valid JSON.

Thank you very much for posting this code. It is very similar to what I just wrote this morning for the JSON-RPC client library. In my case, the JSON-RPC responses
are much more regular so error handling is simple: a) check HTTP response 200, b) check JSON-RPC reply parses into valid JSON (catch exception), c) check JSON-RPC error status.

> I also wanted the promise to reject if the response from mhttpd indicated
> failure - so that we wouldn't have to rewrite this error checking throughout the code.

Right now the JSON-RPC client library does not check the return status of MIDAS calls themselves, i.e. ODBGet("/nonexistant") will go to Promise.resolve() with
the MIDAS db_find_key() status DB_NO_KEY instead of Promise.reject(). So some error handling in Promise.resolve() is still required.

I am thinking how to make these calls go to the error handler automatically, but there is no obvious solution for ODBMGet(["/runinfo", "/nonexistant"]) - the first path
is a success, the second is a failure, do I fail the entire transaction (i.e. with a JSON-RPC error)? Same for JSON-RPC batch transactions - if one transaction
in the batch fails, do I Promise.reject() all of them?

I guess I could "split hairs" and create a separate Promise for each "atomic" transaction, the Promise mechanism does seem to support that,
but this will create more complexity than I feel comfortable with.

Please take a look at the branch feature/js_promise - mjsonrpc_call() is Promisified (resources/mhttpd.js) and the db_copy() example is Promisified (examples/javascript1/example.html)

K.O.

> Right now the JSON-RPC client library does not check the return status of MIDAS calls themselves, i.e. ODBGet("/nonexistant") will go to Promise.resolve() with
> the MIDAS db_find_key() status DB_NO_KEY instead of Promise.reject(). So some error handling in Promise.resolve() is still required.

> I am thinking how to make these calls go to the error handler automatically, but there is no obvious solution for ODBMGet(["/runinfo", "/nonexistant"]) - the first path
> is a success, the second is a failure, do I fail the entire transaction (i.e. with a JSON-RPC error)? Same for JSON-RPC batch transactions - if one transaction
> in the batch fails, do I Promise.reject() all of them?


Generally, I'd prefer a grouped-request like ODBMGet to return an array of
Promises.  This way, I get to decide how to handle the request responses.  While
I do have cases where I use Promise.all(...), most of my current code would want
to treat each response individually.

But as you point out, my approach differs from the Midas approach significantly.
While I've set up my queries to reject on responses like DB_NO_KEY, the function
mjsonrpc_send_request in mhttpd.js tests purely for a successful http
request.

Since ODBMGet makes a *single* http call, I'd naively lean toward having it
return a single Promise.  Presumably, one that resolves if the http request
"goes through" and rejects if the http request fails. 

My perspective may not be the useful one to consider, though.  If other users
expect an array of promises returned from ODBMGet, definitely feel free to
ignore my thoughts on the matter.

If people really want ODBMGet to return an array of promises, one way to do it
would be to have a 'get' function that only cares about the success of the http
request, and a separate 'response checking' function that validates the
response.  ODBMGet can use these two functions together to return an array of
Promises:

#########
mhttpd.js
#########
function get(url) { 
  // return a promise that resolves if the http request returns status=200
  // reject if the http request does anything else
}

function checkResponse(response) {
  // return a promise that resolves for "good" responses
  // and rejects for "bad response"
}

function ODBMGet(path_arr) {
  var url = // build url from path_arr
  
  // syntax get().then(A).catch(B) means
  // if the http request goes through, A is executed
  // if the http request fails, B is executed
  // ;
  // for get, failure means no successful reply at all
  // so ODBMGet should return an array of rejected Promises 
  get(url).then(function(response) {
    response_arr = // split the response
    return response_arr.map(checkResponse)
  }).catch(function(err) {
    return path_arr.forEach(function() {
      return Promise.reject(err)
    })
  })
}

#########
user code
#########
// here the Promises are treated individually
var response_arr = ODBMGet([path1, path2, path3])

response_arr.forEach(function(thisResponse) {
  thisResponse.then( /* do something */ )
              .catch( /* do something else */ )
})

// and here the failure of a single promise in the array
// determines the code that's executed next
var required_arr = ODBMGet([pathA, pathB, pathC])

Promise.all(required_arr).then( /* do something */ )
                         .catch( /* do something else */ )

> > I checked again on browser compatibility:
> > 
> > el6: firefox 38 - ok, google-chrome 27 - no
>
> It looks like this does mean that people using RHEL6 won't have the option of chrome - can they update chrome?
>

It turns out that google-chrome 38 is available for RHEL6/SL6 via an old chromium build. Promises are supported (passes my tests).

See here:
http://www.if-not-true-then-false.com/2013/install-chromium-on-centos-red-hat-rhel

This is where I got the working chromium 38 (no explanation of why there are no newer builds)
http://people.centos.org/hughesjr/chromium/6/x86_64/RPMS/

There appear to be newer builds here: (but I will not test them)
http://install.linux.ncsu.edu/pub/yum/itecs/public/chromium-dev/rhel6/x86_64/

My SL6 google-chrome and chromium instructions:
https://www.triumf.info/wiki/DAQwiki/index.php/SLinstall#Install_Google_Chrome_web_browser_.2864-bit_SL6.29

K.O.

Regarding odb dumps saved into the midas output files, there are several
requests to make it possible to save odb in the json format.

Since 2019-02-12 commits
https://bitbucket.org/tmidas/midas/commits/ccaeeef4d6a1f0d91a67f2dc0a68105b7f6b77ae
and
https://bitbucket.org/tmidas/midas/commits/b3251587a68ef577919c81a221559e9af4dc8ae6

The format of the odb dump is specified by ODB
/Logger/Channels/0/Settings/ODB dump format (default is "json", was hardcoded as "xml").

The filename of the odb dump file saved at the end of run is specified by ODB
/Logger/ODB Last Dump File (default is "last.json", was hardcoded as "last.xml").

In addition, the following defaults have been changed, enabling LZ4 compession and CRC32C checksums by default:

/Logger/ODB dump file (new default is "run%05d.json", was "run%05d.odb")
/Logger/Channels/0/Settings/
Output "FILE"
Compress "lz4"
Checksum "CRC32C".

This brings mlogger default settings closer to what one would expect in the 21st century - "free" compression (LZ4)
and output file data integrity protected by checksums (CRC32C). These defaults are "free" in the sense that turning
them off would not noticeably improve the system performance. (Some users may want to enable better compression,
such as BZIP2 or PBZIP2 and better checksums, such as SHA256 or SHA512 - both choices that have significant CPU-use cost).

The default ODB dump format is now consistently "json" (vs the previous mix of XML and ODB formats).

Why "json" as the default? There has to be some default. The old ODB dump format is right out. Compared to XML,
JSON dump file size is smaller and the encoder is faster (important for reducing the time to start a run - where ODB dump is done twice). Tools for parsing 
JSON data are more widely available and "JSON has won in the marketplace". See also https://www.w3schools.com/js/js_json_xml.asp

Those who want to continue to use XML ODB dumps can trivially continue to do so by changing the settings listed above.

In the rootana package, we have the XmlOdb class for parsing XML ODB dumps, but no matching JsonOdb class for parsing
JSON ODB data. This reminds me of difficulties working with XML data. I originally wrote the XmlOdb class using
the "libxml2" package. After discovering that many Linux distributions do not install this package by default, I switched
to the DOM and XML parsers from ROOT (since rootana is not very useful without ROOT anyway). Only to discover that
some binary ROOT distributions distributed by CERN exclude the XML parser from their default build.

I do intend to write the JsonOdb class for rootana, and I will probably do it using the mjson.{h,cxx} parser that I wrote
for MIDAS. (lack of the JsonOdb class is the reason I did not switch MIDAS ODB dumps to JSON much earlier
than now. the camel back was broken by the extra slow run start time in the ALPHA-g DAQ system).

K.O.

>
> With the removal of the requirement to make it possible to write MIDAS frontends in C, we can switch the MIDAS 
> default build to C++ and start using C++ features in the MIDAS API (std::string, std::vector, etc).
> 

Consider the most basic C++ construct, std::string, and observe how many member functions are annotated "c++11", "c++17", etc:
https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/string/basic_string

For MIDAS this means that we cannot target "a" C++ or "the" C++, we have to chose between C++ "before C++11", C++11, C++17 
(plus the incoming c++20).

For example, the ROOT 6 package requires C++11 *and* g++ >= 4.8.

Now consider the platforms we use at TRIUMF:

- Linux RHEL/SL/CentOS6 - gcc 4.4.7, no C++11.
- Linux RHEL/SL/CentOS7 - gcc 4.8.5, full C++11, no C++14, no C++17
- Ubuntu 18.04.2 LTS - gcc 7.3.0, full C++11, full C++14, "experimental" C++17.
- MacOS 10.13 - llvm 10.0.0 (clang-1000.11.45.5), full C++11, full C++14, full C++17.

(see here for GCC C++ support: https://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx-status.html)
(see here for LLVM clang c++ support: https://clang.llvm.org/cxx_status.html)

As is easy to see from the std::string reference how C++17 has a large number of very useful new features.

Alas, at TRIUMF we still run MIDAS on many SL6 machines where C++11 and C++17 is not normally available. I estimate another 1-2 
years before all our SL6 machines are upgraded to RHEL/SL/CentOS7 (or Ubuntu LTS).

This means we cannot use C++11 and C++17 in MIDAS yet. We are stuck with pre-C++11 for now.

Remarks:
- there will be trouble right away as both Stefan and myself do MIDAS development on MacOS where full C++17 is available and is 
tempting to use. (as they say, watch this space)
- it is possible to install a newer C++ compiler into RHEL/SL/CentOS 6 and 7 systems, but we are loath to require this (same as we 
are loath to require cmake for building MIDAS) - the "I" in MIDAS means integrated, meaning "does not require installing 100 
additional packages before one can use it".
- the MS Windows situation is unclear, but since one has to install the C++ compiler as an additional package anyway, I do not see 
any problem with requiring C++17 support, with a choice of MS compilers, GCC and LLVM. I doubt we will support anything older 
than Windows 10.

K.O.

> [which c++]
> 
> - Linux RHEL/SL/CentOS6 - gcc 4.4.7, no C++11.
> - Linux RHEL/SL/CentOS7 - gcc 4.8.5, full C++11, no C++14, no C++17
>

The construct I now always use:

class X {
int a = 0; // do not leave data members uninitialized, see "Non-static data member initializers", N2756 and N2628
}

is only available starting from gcc 4.7, see https://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx-status.html

Another nail into the coffin of "pre c++11" c++ and el < el7.

Hmm...

K.O.

> >
> > With the removal of the requirement to make it possible to write MIDAS frontends in C, we can switch the MIDAS 
> > default build to C++ and start using C++ features in the MIDAS API (std::string, std::vector, etc).
> > 

C++ is a big animal. Obviously we want to use std::string, std::vector and similar improvements over plain C (we already use "//" for comments).

But in keeping with the Camel's nose fable (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camel%27s_nose), there are some parts of C++ we definitely do not want to use in MIDAS. Even the C++ FAQ talks 
about "evil features", see https://isocpp.org/wiki/faq/big-picture#use-evil-things-sometimes

Here is my list of things to use and to avoid. Comments on this are very welcome - as everybody's experience with C++ is different (and everybody's experience is very valuable and very 
welcome).

- std::string, std:vector, etc are in. I am already using them in the MIDAS API (midas.h)
- extern "C" is out, everything has to be C++, will remove "extern "C"" from all midas header files.
- exceptions are out, see https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1736146/why-is-exception-handling-bad
- std::thread and std::mutex are in, at least for writing new frontends, but see discussion of "cannot use c++11". (maybe replace ss_mutex_xxx() with out own std::mutex look-alike).
- heavy use of templates and heavy use of argument overloading is out - just by looking at the code, impossible to tell what function will be called
- "auto" is on probation. I need to know if "auto v=f()" is an integer or a double when I write "auto w=v/2" or "auto w=v/2.0". see 
https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/180216/does-auto-make-c-code-harder-to-understand
- unreadable gibberish is out (lambdas, etc)
- C-style malloc()/free() is in. C++ new and delete are okey, but "delete[]" confuses me.
- C-style printf() is in. C++ cout and "<<" gunk provide no way to easily format the output for easy reading.

K.O.

Dear Konstantin,

even if I am still quite young and have only limited experience (but not null), I would like to give my two cents. I have reflected a bit about the C++ issue, also because I am developing a 
brand new MIDAS interface for the WAGASCI-T2K experiment, and I feel that the future of MIDAS could influence the future of our DAQ system, too. I'll start from the conclusions: I completely 
agree with you on a practical level, even if I kind of disagree on an "ethical" level.

What you propose in essence is to migrate the MIDAS core from pure C to a version of C with some fancy C++ features. Let's say a kind of C+ with only one plus. Theoretically speaking, even if 
on the surface C and C++ are very similar, they are completely different languages and require different mindsets (and I am sure that everyone is aware of it). This is the reason why even if I 
would have preferred to develop the MIDAS frontend for our experiment in C++, I have chosen to stick to pure C because I feel that MIDAS is still very C-like in its architecture (or from what 
I can see from the documentation). So I wanted to "keep on track" for better internal coherence. What I mean is that, if someone told me to port a C project of mine to C++, I would end up 
rewriting it almost completely, instead of just modifying it (I really don't know how much of the MIDAS core has been written with C++ in mind, so if a large part of it is already C++-like, 
please ignore my comment above).

Anyway, on a practical level, I completely agree with your approach, because I imagine that a complete rewrite of MIDAS is off the table but, at the same time, some new C++ features like 
better string and vector handling are very tempting to use. Moreover, in general, physicists are more familiar with the C syntax than with the C++ one (but thanks to ROOT that is changing). As 
for the use of MIDAS in embedded devices, I have no experience so I refrain from judging. So, in the particular case of MIDAS, what you propose is probably the best and only option.

As far as the C++ standard to adopt, I would say that the C++11 standard is the best fit for the T2K experiment since the official OS for T2K is CentOS7 and, out of the box, it supports C++11 
only. Anyway, I acknowledge that there are many other experiments and requirements. For the records, I do development on Ubuntu 18.04.

Best regards
Giorgio

some semi-random thoughts:

no templates strictly means you can't use std::string, std::vector etc.

printf is in any case part of C++ (#include <cstdio>), but std::ostreams can be faster (for std::cout, endl line causes buffer flushing, whereas "\n" does not flush the buffer but printf
always flushes the buffer), and formatting is possible (though very long winded).  printf does not allow to print things other than simple data, e.g. BANK_HEADER* bh; printf( "%?", *bh);

I've been writing all our DAQ code in C++ for a while now.

> > >
> > > With the removal of the requirement to make it possible to write MIDAS frontends in C, we can switch the MIDAS 
> > > default build to C++ and start using C++ features in the MIDAS API (std::string, std::vector, etc).
> > > 
> 
> C++ is a big animal. Obviously we want to use std::string, std::vector and similar improvements over plain C (we already use "//" for comments).
> 
> But in keeping with the Camel's nose fable (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camel%27s_nose), there are some parts of C++ we definitely do not want to use in MIDAS. Even the C++ FAQ talks 
> about "evil features", see https://isocpp.org/wiki/faq/big-picture#use-evil-things-sometimes
> 
> Here is my list of things to use and to avoid. Comments on this are very welcome - as everybody's experience with C++ is different (and everybody's experience is very valuable and very 
> welcome).
> 
> - std::string, std:vector, etc are in. I am already using them in the MIDAS API (midas.h)
> - extern "C" is out, everything has to be C++, will remove "extern "C"" from all midas header files.
> - exceptions are out, see https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1736146/why-is-exception-handling-bad
> - std::thread and std::mutex are in, at least for writing new frontends, but see discussion of "cannot use c++11". (maybe replace ss_mutex_xxx() with out own std::mutex look-alike).
> - heavy use of templates and heavy use of argument overloading is out - just by looking at the code, impossible to tell what function will be called
> - "auto" is on probation. I need to know if "auto v=f()" is an integer or a double when I write "auto w=v/2" or "auto w=v/2.0". see 
> https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/180216/does-auto-make-c-code-harder-to-understand
> - unreadable gibberish is out (lambdas, etc)
> - C-style malloc()/free() is in. C++ new and delete are okey, but "delete[]" confuses me.
> - C-style printf() is in. C++ cout and "<<" gunk provide no way to easily format the output for easy reading.
> 
> K.O.

• my_frontend.cpp
  
• driver/class/my_class_driver.cpp
  
• driver/device/my_device_driver.cpp
  

@@ -1141,7 +1141,13 @@ typedef struct eqpmnt {
+#ifdef __cplusplus
+extern "C" {
+#endif
 INT device_driver(DEVICE_DRIVER *device_driver, INT cmd, ...);
+#ifdef __cplusplus
+}
+#endif

> Dear Konstantin and others, our recent discussion stimulated my curiosity and I wrote a small frontend for the trigger board of our 
experiment in C++.

Yay!

> my_frontend.cpp

In MIDAS we are using .cxx, not .cpp, per ROOT coding convention https://root.cern.ch/coding-conventions

> the overall structure is still very C-like

this is object-oriented programming done in C. (actually C++ looks exactly the same if you look behind the curtain)

right now we do not hope to rewrite the slow control class driver framework in C++, but if somebody does it,
we should be happy to add it to midas.

for the mfe.c framework, I have a new C++ class based frontend framework in development (and already in use
in the ALPHA-g experiment at CERN). There is a number of lose ends to polish befire I can add it to midas.
And as usual the last 10% of the work consume 90% of the time.

> the MIDAS frontend mfe.c has still only the C version (I couldn't find any mfe.cxx). 
> This means that all the points of contact between the MIDAS frontend code and the user frontend code must be C compatible
> (no C++ features or name mangling).

this will change with the switch to C++, mfe.c will become mfe.cxx and I shall add the required definitions to mfe.h (or midas.h, TBD)

> To accomplish this I needed to slightly modify the midas.h header file like this:
> +#ifdef __cplusplus
> +extern "C" {
> +#endif
>  INT device_driver(DEVICE_DRIVER *device_driver, INT cmd, ...);

I intend for all "extern "C"" to go away, everything will use the C++ linkage (and name mangling). This will break existing frontends
and I will need to write clear instructions on converting them to the new scheme.

> I also tested the new strcomb1 function and it seems to work OK.

good.

> I have attached a source file to show how I implemented the device driver in C++

Yup, looks familiar, I have a couple of C++ frontends written like this, too.

K.O.

For a long time now we have keep the core of midas (odb.c, midas.c, etc) compatible with plain C and by default 
we have built the MIDAS library using the plain C compiler. Over time, we have switched most MIDAS programs 
(mhttpd, mlogger, mdump, odbedit, etc) to C++ (with happy results). (and for a long time now, all of MIDAS 
could be build as C++, even if the default build remained plain C).

The main reason for keeping the core of MIDAS as C has been to allow writing MIDAS frontends in C - for 
example, in environments with no C++ compilers or no C++ runtime (VxWorks) or where C++ had too much 
overhead (small memory machines, etc).

Today, all concerns against using C++ seem to have receded into the past. C++ compilers are now always 
available, even for small embedded systems. C++ overheads are now well understood and one can easily write 
C++ code that is as efficient as C for using limited CPU and memory resources. (While at the same time, today's 
embedded systems tend to have more CPU and RAM than "big" MIDAS DAQ machines had in the past - 1GHz 
CPU, 1GB RAM is pretty typical for embedded ARM).

As examples of small hardware where MIDAS frontends written in C++ worked just fine, consider the T2K ND280 
FGD data collector running on XILINX FPGA with a 300MHz PowerPC and 128 Mbytes of RAM (standard Linux 
kernel) and the GRIFFIN Clock distribution module control running on a Microsemi FPGA with a 300MHz ARM 
CPU (ucLinux without an MMU). More typical Cyclone-5 ARM SoCs with 1GB RAM and 1GHz CPU run standard 
Linux (CentOS7) and can build MIDAS natively (no need for cross-compiling).

With the removal of the requirement to make it possible to write MIDAS frontends in C, we can switch the MIDAS 
default build to C++ and start using C++ features in the MIDAS API (std::string, std::vector, etc).

Next to consider is "which C++ should we use?".

K.O.

> switch MIDAS to C++

switch to C++ will proceed as follows:

- create a new branch off develop (feature/switch_to_cxx)
- remove all extern "C", ifdef c++, etc
- switch Makefile from gcc to g++
- test
- merge into develop
- before merge, tag the last "C" midas
- cut a new release branch (tentatively feature/midas-2019-06)

the last recommended "pre-C++" midas will remain the midas-2019-03 release (where we can retroactively apply bug fixes, as I just did a few minutes ago).

K.O.

Hi, Stefan & co - now that midas is c++11 and c++11 comes with a threads library, should we 
switch midas to use the c++11 threads instead of pthreads? (Of course on Linux c++11 
threads are a layer on top of pthreads, the best I know).

This should remove the dependency on pthreads.h and use a more native implementation of 
threads on MacOS and Windows. (again, the best I can tell).

Of course this depends on c++11 threads having all the functions we need. Specifically, "lock 
with timeout" is useful to deal with "gah! everything stopped! what do I do!", a problem 
bedeviling midas in the early days (and still happens today!). Current midas kills everything 
after 5 minutes of deadlock - then the user knows how to restart everything and the developer 
has core dumps to look at. (to see which program/thread holds the lock and would not give it 
up).

Any thoughts on this?

K.O.

I'm thinking of this already since some time, and it was part of my motivation switching to C++11.
I was delighted to see that what we do in system.c (encapsulate system functions such as threads
and shared memory) is now done natively in C++11, and it's done by experts and not amateurs like us.

I see that with std::timed_mutex and try_lock_for we have the desired timeout function. Pity that
C++11 does not contain inter-process communication like semaphores, so there we still have to use
our old functions. 

But for threads switching to std::thread, I'm all in.

Stefan

> Hi, Stefan & co - now that midas is c++11 and c++11 comes with a threads library, should we 
> switch midas to use the c++11 threads instead of pthreads? (Of course on Linux c++11 
> threads are a layer on top of pthreads, the best I know).
> 
> This should remove the dependency on pthreads.h and use a more native implementation of 
> threads on MacOS and Windows. (again, the best I can tell).
> 
> Of course this depends on c++11 threads having all the functions we need. Specifically, "lock 
> with timeout" is useful to deal with "gah! everything stopped! what do I do!", a problem 
> bedeviling midas in the early days (and still happens today!). Current midas kills everything 
> after 5 minutes of deadlock - then the user knows how to restart everything and the developer 
> has core dumps to look at. (to see which program/thread holds the lock and would not give it 
> up).
> 
> Any thoughts on this?
> 
> K.O.

> Hi, Stefan & co - now that midas is c++11 and c++11 comes with a threads library, should we 
> switch midas to use the c++11 threads instead of pthreads? (Of course on Linux c++11 
> threads are a layer on top of pthreads, the best I know).
> 
> This should remove the dependency on pthreads.h and use a more native implementation of 
> threads on MacOS and Windows. (again, the best I can tell).
> 
> Of course this depends on c++11 threads having all the functions we need. Specifically, "lock 
> with timeout" is useful to deal with "gah! everything stopped! what do I do!", a problem 
> bedeviling midas in the early days (and still happens today!). Current midas kills everything 
> after 5 minutes of deadlock - then the user knows how to restart everything and the developer 
> has core dumps to look at. (to see which program/thread holds the lock and would not give it 
> up).
> 
> Any thoughts on this?
> 
> K.O.

Hi, I just wanted to say that I have seen this post and maybe that is the solution to the pthreads compiler problem in OS 10.15, but 
of course I am a total amateur in here. Thanks for thinking about this and I will wait and hold to see what gets decided. Thanks

Berta  

 Hi,
I was trying to update the checkout of Midas, but it looks like something is not
working - maybe a component of the Savannah system:
[sergio@daq-pc midas-SVN]$ svn update
svn@savannah.psi.ch's password: svn
unix dgram connect: Connection refused at /bin/cvssh.pl line 32
no connection to syslog available at /bin/cvssh.pl line 32
svn: Connection closed unexpectedly

my .svn/entries says (amongst the rest)
 url="svn+ssh://svn@savannah.psi.ch/afs/psi.ch/project/meg/svn/midas/trunk"
and yes, it used to work well... 

Cheers,
  Sergio

>  Hi,
> I was trying to update the checkout of Midas, but it looks like something is not
> working - maybe a component of the Savannah system:
> [sergio@daq-pc midas-SVN]$ svn update
> svn@savannah.psi.ch's password: svn
> unix dgram connect: Connection refused at /bin/cvssh.pl line 32
> no connection to syslog available at /bin/cvssh.pl line 32
> svn: Connection closed unexpectedly
> 
> my .svn/entries says (amongst the rest)
>  url="svn+ssh://svn@savannah.psi.ch/afs/psi.ch/project/meg/svn/midas/trunk"
> and yes, it used to work well... 
> 
> Cheers,
>   Sergio

I just tried now and it seemed to work fine. Do you still have the problem?

- Stefan

> I just tried now and it seemed to work fine. Do you still have the problem?
> 
> - Stefan

 The problem was still there this morning, shortly after seeing your mail, but seems
to be fixed now.
 BTW, which is the best way to submit patches ? I have a version of khyt1331 for Linux
kernel 2.6 (we are running Scientific Linux 4.1), and a few smaller things, mostly in
the examples. 

 Thanks, Sergio

Fuming, fuming, fuming.

The combination of "make indent" and "svn update" completely trashed my work copy of midas. Half of 
the files now show as status "M", half as status "C" ("in conflict"), even those I never edited myself (e.g. 
mscb firmware files).

I think what happened as that once I ran "make indent", the indent program did things to the source 
files (changed indentation, added spaces in "foo(a,b,c); --> foo(a, b, c);" etc, so now svn thinks that I 
edited the files and they are in conflict with later modifications.

I suggest that nobody ever ever ever should use "make indent", and if they do, they should better 
commit their "changes" made by indent very quickly, before their midas tree is trashed by the next "svn 
update".

And if they commit the changes made by "make indent", beware that "make indent" is not idempotent, 
running it multiple times, it keeps changing files (keeps moving some dox comments around).

Also beware of entering a tug-of-war with Stefan - at least on my machines, my "make indent" seems 
to produce different output from his.

Still fuming, even after some venting...
K.O.