Re: [bug-inetutils] [SCM] GNU Inetutils branch, master, updated. inetutils-1_9_1-36-gb4a938f

[Mats Erik Andersson]

söndag den 26 februari 2012 klockan 13:49 skrev Alfred M. Szmidt detta:
>    > Keep up the good work Mats!
>    > 
>    >    +# Prerequisites:
>    >    +#
>    >    +#  * Shell: SVR4 Bourne shell, or newer.
>    >    +#
>    >    +#  * cat(1), expr(1), head(1), kill(1), pwd(1), rm(1).
>    >    +#
>    >    +#  * id(1), grep(1), mktemp(1), ps(1).
>    > 
>    > Is there a reason for these type of comments?  I don't see why
>    > this is useful.
> 
>    Mostly to give a hint to any external tester, in a hope that he or
>    she takes a look at the failing script before filing a bug.
> 
> Wouldn't it be better then to check for this in configure.ac?  Or at
> least assume the same tools as we use in the Makefiles (awk, cat, cmp,
> cp, diff, echo, egrep, expr, false, grep, install-info, ln, ls, mkdir,
> mv, printf, pwd, rm, rmdir, sed, sleep, sort, tar, test, touch, tr,
> true) and only list what is needed over that?

This is a good point. I have a patch set pending to get rid of head(1),
ps(1), and wc(1), as a starter, so the prerequisite list you gave as
illustration will shrink to "kill(1), id(1), mktemp(1)". This will
improve transparency.

Are tests in "configure.ac" intended to cover actions in excess of
configuration and build steps? Personally, I view tests as optional
secondary steps for which I do not like the configuration step to
erect any blockers, instead warnings at most. The effort to keep
requisites of tests ajour also in "configure.ac" is slightly more
than we should take upon ourselves.

Best regards,
  Mats