On Fri, Sep 20, 2024 at 11:00:22PM +0100, Gavin Smith wrote: > On Fri, Sep 20, 2024 at 11:43:16PM +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 20, 2024 at 10:21:01PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > > Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2024 20:43:45 +0200 > > > > From: Patrice Dumas <pertu...@free.fr> > > > > > > > > Many info tests on cygwin-32 fail (release 7.1 branch). I attach the > > > > info tests log, I can provide more information on configure output, and > > > > some other logs if needed. > > > > > > > > ===================================================== > > > > GNU Texinfo 7.1.1-20240920: info/test-suite.log > > > > ===================================================== > > > > > > > > # TOTAL: 87 > > > > # PASS: 51 > > > > # SKIP: 0 > > > > # XFAIL: 0 > > > > # FAIL: 36 > > > > # XPASS: 0 > > > > # ERROR: 0 > > > > > > That's most probably the side effect of using Cygwin tools again: the > > > native port of info cannot run many of the tests because the test rig > > > uses features not supported by native Windows programs (emulation of > > > terminals and other such stuff). When running the tests with MSYS, > > > the test suite detects that and skips those tests, but since you run > > > them with Cygwin, I'm guessing that the way the test suite detects > > > Windows ports fails for some reason. > > > > > > My records from running the test suite in Texinfo-7.1 indicate that 56 > > > of the info tests were skipped, whereas above you say that none were > > > skipped. So I'm quite sure this is the reason. > > > > Actually, my feeling is that it is the absence of posix_openpt that > > triggers have_ptys to be false, which in turn causes pseudotty not to > > be built. In the CI tests, cygwin have posix_openpt, while mingw (in > > cygwin) does not. > > > > Gavin, maybe you could have a look? > > My first question is what exactly "mingw in cygwin" means. If this is > some mixture of mingw (i.e. a native MS-Windows environment) and cygwin > then it may not be a setup worth supporting, due to subtle incompatibilities > between the two, as has been recently discussed. > > If it is Texinfo built on cygwin to run in cygwin, as a cygwin program > (not a native MS-Windows program), that is different and may be more worth > supporting.
This case is indeed Texinfo built on cygwin to run in cygwin, as a cygwin program. -- Pat
