On 1/21/21 5:07 PM, Mathias Steiger wrote:

As such bugs are likely related to buffer issues, maybe even in underlying APIs, and since they only surface after very lengthy mysterious sequences of commands - often just on single specific system installations - I wouldn't know how you can reproduce this in a test.

And that's the problem. While the behavior you're seeing may be related to
some `buffer issue', it's just as likely that there's some issue with how
autoconf-generated scripts manipulate file descriptors or that your script
interacts badly in some other way with what autoconf generates. But without
a way to reproduce it independently, there's no way to tell whether it's a
bug separate from autoconf.

Maybe you have specific testing frameworks for this, that would reduce the whole script to more basic components and which schematically remove or add complexity until the nature of the bug becomes more apparent?

This is why I advised you to report it to bug-autoconf. They're more
familiar with the code generator and what problems might result from it.

Of course in a giant script, all sorts of random things might happen. But this is not one of them.

Maybe. Maybe not. You just don't have enough information to say.

--
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
                 ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU    c...@case.edu    http://tiswww.cwru.edu/~chet/

      • ... Greg Wooledge
      • ... Chet Ramey
        • ... Mathias Steiger
          • ... Eduardo Bustamante
            • ... mathias . steiger--- via Bug reports for the GNU Bourne Again SHell
              • ... Eduardo A . Bustamante López
              • ... Tadeus Prastowo
              • ... Oğuz
              • ... Elias Haisch
            • ... mathias . steiger--- via Bug reports for the GNU Bourne Again SHell
          • ... Chet Ramey
            • ... Mathias Steiger
      • ... Mathias Steiger
  • Re: ob... Dale R. Worley

Reply via email to