[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Avoid certain spurious `testsuite' rebuilds
From: |
Ralf Wildenhues |
Subject: |
Re: Avoid certain spurious `testsuite' rebuilds |
Date: |
Mon, 10 Apr 2006 13:40:30 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.11 |
Hi Stepan,
* Stepan Kasal wrote on Mon, Apr 10, 2006 at 11:40:33AM CEST:
> On Sun, Apr 09, 2006 at 11:43:11AM -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
>
> > Most of this patch has nothing to do with the original goal of avoiding some
> > spurious `testsuite' rebuilds, [...]
>
> Yes, you are right. There are two changes:
> 1) mktests.sh is no longer a maintainer tool, thus $(TESTSUITE_GENERATED_AT)
> are no longer distributed,
> 2) avoid spurious rebuilds.
>
> But I realized this too late, so I left it as a combined patch.
Which means I'll ignore this for 2.60.
> > They do expose folks who simply want to run the test suite of an unmodified
> > Autoconf to any portability problems in `mktests.sh'.
>
> I understand that mktests.sh is no longer considered maintainer-only, so this
> should be OK.
Dangerous. I don't like this much.
Please note that you mix up cause and effect here: the effort to make
mktests.sh more portable was caused by the fact that the build system
failed to not update the generated tests, not the other way round.
> Moreover I made the change discussed elsewhere that mktests.sh should
> fail in the created *.at file happens to be empty.
You forgot to adjust the part in the trap.
> +$(TESTSUITE): $(TESTSUITE_dependencies) $(AUTOCONF_FILES)
> + $(srcdir)/mktests.sh $(AUTOCONF_FILES)
> + test ! -f $@ || mv $@ address@hidden
> + $(MAKE) $(AM_MAKEFLAGS) address@hidden
> + touch address@hidden
> mv address@hidden $@
>
> +$(TESTSUITE).tmp: $(TESTSUITE_dependencies) $(TESTSUITE_GENERATED_AT)
> + cd $(top_builddir)/lib/autotest && $(MAKE) $(AM_MAKEFLAGS) autotest.m4f
> + $(AUTOTEST) -I $(srcdir) suite.at -o $@
I don't like a genuine target name that ends in `.tmp' much, to be
honest.
Cheers,
Ralf
- Re: Avoid certain spurious `testsuite' rebuilds, (continued)
- Re: Avoid certain spurious `testsuite' rebuilds, Paul Eggert, 2006/04/05
- Re: Avoid certain spurious `testsuite' rebuilds, Stepan Kasal, 2006/04/09
- Re: Avoid certain spurious `testsuite' rebuilds, Noah Misch, 2006/04/09
- Re: Avoid certain spurious `testsuite' rebuilds, Stepan Kasal, 2006/04/10
- Re: Avoid certain spurious `testsuite' rebuilds,
Ralf Wildenhues <=
- Re: Avoid certain spurious `testsuite' rebuilds, Stepan Kasal, 2006/04/10
- Re: Avoid certain spurious `testsuite' rebuilds, Ralf Wildenhues, 2006/04/10
- Re: Avoid certain spurious `testsuite' rebuilds, Paul Eggert, 2006/04/10
- Re: Avoid certain spurious `testsuite' rebuilds, Stepan Kasal, 2006/04/10
- Re: Avoid certain spurious `testsuite' rebuilds, Stepan Kasal, 2006/04/10
- Re: Avoid certain spurious `testsuite' rebuilds, Noah Misch, 2006/04/10
- Re: Avoid certain spurious `testsuite' rebuilds, Stepan Kasal, 2006/04/10
- Re: Avoid certain spurious `testsuite' rebuilds, Paul Eggert, 2006/04/10
- Re: Avoid certain spurious `testsuite' rebuilds, Stepan Kasal, 2006/04/10
- Re: Avoid certain spurious `testsuite' rebuilds, Paul Eggert, 2006/04/10