[reSIProcate] gperf updates? Remove some hackery.

[Adam Roach]

I'm of the mind that we should probably support the 2.x versions for a 
year or two until we can make a safe assumption that everyone has had an 
opportunity to move to an upgraded version. The existing processing 
doesn't seem particularly fragile; it's already in place; and it works. 
(If someone has evidence to refute any of these three assertions, I'm 
game to change my mind.) Consequently, I'm not sure what the benefit 
would be to changing it, and the downside is clear.

/a

Jason Fischl wrote:
> The only thing i'll point out is that this will break the build on
> lots of embedded systems. What does it really buy us?
>
> On 10/9/07, Byron Campen <bcampen at estacado.net> wrote:
>   
>> 	I'm all for it.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Byron Campen
>>
>>     
>>> I've noticed that the newer versions of gperf permit case-insensitive
>>> hashes to be generated. I find this oddly satisfying given that the
>>> GNU/FSF position on this previously was 'over my dead body'.
>>>
>>> What are peoples' feelings around updating our build process to
>>> leverage gperf 3.X and remove the hackery that edits the output of
>>> the hash function generators?
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>> Alan
>>>
>>> Alan Hawrylyshen
>>> a l a n a t p o l y p h a s e d o t c a
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> resiprocate-devel mailing list
>>> resiprocate-devel at resiprocate.org
>>> https://list.resiprocate.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel
>>>       
>>     
> _______________________________________________
> resiprocate-devel mailing list
> resiprocate-devel at resiprocate.org
> https://list.resiprocate.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel
>