[PATCH v2] Overhauled and modularized tests in `instspc.test'.

Hi Ralf, thanks for the helpful review. Your objections, reasonings and suggestsions have been quite enlighting, and brought me to the understandanding that most of our problems were deriving by the juggling of "weird strings" ;-> between gen-instspc-tests, instspc.sh and the generated Makefile.in

Re: [PATCH] Add new 'AM_PROG_AR' macro, triggering the 'ar-lib' script.

On Wednesday 15 September 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > For now, I didn't get any further than just some comments upon > comments (a review-review, if you like): > > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 01:45:17AM CEST: > > On Tuesday 14 September 2010, Peter Rosin wrote: > > > Den 2

Re: [PATCH] Add new 'AM_PROG_AR' macro, triggering the 'ar-lib' script.

For now, I didn't get any further than just some comments upon comments (a review-review, if you like): * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 01:45:17AM CEST: > On Tuesday 14 September 2010, Peter Rosin wrote: > > Den 2010-09-14 20:14 skrev Stefano Lattarini: > > >> + [am_ar_try='$

[FYI] {maint} tests/README: Don't put GCS mandated tools in $required.

This is what I'll push if there are no further objections. Regards, Stefano -*-*-*- tests/README: Don't put GCS mandated tools in $required. --- ChangeLog|4 tests/README |4 +++- 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/ChangeLog b/ChangeLog index 7b64

Re: [PATCH] Overhauled and modularized tests in `instspc.test'.

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 02:15:59PM CEST: > On Monday 13 September 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > The patch introduces significant extra testsuite overhead. > How much, quantitatively speaking? Dunno. Well, it adds 2*N aclocal, autoconf, and automake invocations with N

Re: [PATCH v2] Work around a bug in Solaris make's file-inclusion mechanism.

Hi Ralf. Thanks for the review. On Wednesday 15 September 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 01:26:50PM CEST: > > OK for maint? > > I really think you should use an extra function normalize_file_name > to do the job, for maintainability. > > > I do

Re: [PATCH v2] Work around a bug in Solaris make's file-inclusion mechanism.

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 01:26:50PM CEST: > OK for maint? I really think you should use an extra function normalize_file_name to do the job, for maintainability. Please run make maintainer-check. Typo patologic. A couple more nits below. I don't think we want subobj11c

Re: [SIMPLE PATCH] {maint} Make HACKING visible to the end user

Hi Ralf. This patch was mostly bike-shedding, so I'm ok with dropping it. Also, for the same reason, do not feel compelled to answer this message. That said... On Wednesday 15 September 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 10:36:28PM CEST: > > Since I

Re: Mentioning HACKING in ChangeLog

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 08:33:55PM CEST: > On Monday 13 September 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > > > I'm pushing this to maint. > I see that, in fact, the pushed commit also contains a ChangeLog entry, > while HACKING explicitly mandate not to be mentioned in ChangeLog

Re: [SIMPLE PATCH] {maint} Make HACKING visible to the end user

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 10:36:28PM CEST: > Since I see no reason forcing us to keep the HACKING file "invisible" > to the end user (not in ChangeLog, not in distributed tarball, ...), > I've gone ahead and written a very simple patch to mke it "visible". > OK for maint? I

Re: [SIMPLE PATCH] {maint} tests/README: Tell not to put `gzip' in $required.

On Wednesday 15 September 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 10:18:37PM CEST: > > - Use `required=...' for required tools. > > + Use `required=...' for required tools. But do not explicitly > > require + the `gzip' tool: it should just be taken for

Re: [SIMPLE PATCH] {maint} Fixlets for HACKING.

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 10:52:04PM CEST: > OK for maint? OK. Thanks, Ralf > * HACKING (Administrivia): Fixed typo `NES' for `NEWS'. > (Naming): Do not refer to a convention dating back to Feb 2001 > as "very new". Related rewording. > (Working with Git): Now we requir

Re: [SIMPLE PATCH] {maint} tests/README: Tell not to put `gzip' in $required.

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 10:18:37PM CEST: > - Use `required=...' for required tools. > + Use `required=...' for required tools. But do not explicitly require > + the `gzip' tool: it should just be taken for granted. The list of tools that can be taken for granted is li

Re: [PATCH] {msvc} Regenerate with autoconf 2.67

On Wednesday 15 September 2010, Peter Rosin wrote: > Den 2010-09-15 17:13 skrev Stefano Lattarini: > > That considered: Peter, do you now think it's ok to apply my > > patch? > > Whatever. If you think it will be so much easier for you, then go > ahead. I guess I'll have to cope somehow... Since y

Re: [PATCH] {msvc} Regenerate with autoconf 2.67

Den 2010-09-15 17:13 skrev Stefano Lattarini: > That considered: Peter, do you now think it's ok to apply my patch? Whatever. If you think it will be so much easier for you, then go ahead. I guess I'll have to cope somehow... Cheers, Peter

Re: [PATCH] {msvc} Regenerate with autoconf 2.67

[adding bug-autoconf] On 09/15/2010 09:13 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: Ouch! On my Debian box, I had to build my own autoconf 2.67 from sources to use with automake, since at least this chunk of the debian patch: --- autoconf-2.67.orig/lib/m4sugar/m4sh.m4 +++ autoconf-2.67/lib/m4sugar/m4sh.

Re: [PATCH] {msvc} Regenerate with autoconf 2.67

Hi Eric, thanks for the timely info. On Wednesday 15 September 2010, Eric Blake wrote: > On 09/15/2010 08:52 AM, Peter Rosin wrote: > > Can we please wait with that until Cygwin releases autoconf 2.67? > > It already has: > http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-announce/2010-09/msg3.html Quoting from

Re: [PATCH] {msvc} Regenerate with autoconf 2.67

Den 2010-09-15 16:57 skrev Eric Blake: > On 09/15/2010 08:52 AM, Peter Rosin wrote: >> Can we please wait with that until Cygwin releases autoconf 2.67? > > It already has: > http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-announce/2010-09/msg3.html Oh boy, that's quick! No objections then... Cheers, Peter

Re: [PATCH] {msvc} Regenerate with autoconf 2.67

On 09/15/2010 08:52 AM, Peter Rosin wrote: Can we please wait with that until Cygwin releases autoconf 2.67? It already has: http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-announce/2010-09/msg3.html -- Eric Blake ebl...@redhat.com+1-801-349-2682 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org

Re: [PATCH] {msvc} Regenerate with autoconf 2.67

Den 2010-09-15 16:35 skrev Stefano Lattarini: > Hello automakers. > > The "msvc" branch still has configure and aclocal.m4 generated > with autoconf 2.65, while the "maint" and "master" branches use > autoconf 2.67. > > This can cause annoying situations when switching among branches, > such as

[PATCH] {msvc} Regenerate with autoconf 2.67

Hello automakers. The "msvc" branch still has configure and aclocal.m4 generated with autoconf 2.65, while the "maint" and "master" branches use autoconf 2.67. This can cause annoying situations when switching among branches, such as forcing the developer to fiddle with PATH each time to ensure

Re: [PATCH] Add new 'AM_PROG_AR' macro, triggering the 'ar-lib' script.

On Wednesday 15 September 2010, Peter Rosin wrote: > Den 2010-09-15 12:47 skrev Stefano Lattarini: > > Honestly, I've never had to do such a "fake merge" myself in > > practice; but I can point you to the excellent explanation Ralf > > gave to me about the issue: > >

Re: [PATCH] Add new 'AM_PROG_AR' macro, triggering the 'ar-lib' script.

Den 2010-09-15 12:47 skrev Stefano Lattarini: > On Wednesday 15 September 2010, Peter Rosin wrote: >> BTW, I forgot to ask before, but can you please point out such a >> fake merge, so that I can see what I should aim for? > Honestly, I've never had to do such a "fake merge" myself in practice; > b

[PATCH v2] Work around a bug in Solaris make's file-inclusion mechanism.

Gosh, it has been trickier than I expected! OK for maint? Regards, Stefano -*-*- Work around a bug in file-inclusion mechanism of Solaris make. * automake.in (handle_single_transform): In the name of the dependency file: collapse multiple slash characters into a single one. * tests/subobj11

Re: [PATCH] Add new 'AM_PROG_AR' macro, triggering the 'ar-lib' script.

On Wednesday 15 September 2010, Peter Rosin wrote: > BTW, I forgot to ask before, but can you please point out such a > fake merge, so that I can see what I should aim for? Honestly, I've never had to do such a "fake merge" myself in practice; but I can point you to the excellent explanation Ralf g

Re: [PATCH] Add new 'AM_PROG_AR' macro, triggering the 'ar-lib' script.

On Wednesday 15 September 2010, Peter Rosin wrote: > Hi Stefano, > > Den 2010-09-15 01:45 skrev Stefano Lattarini: > +: ${AR=ar} > + > +AC_CACHE_CHECK([the archiver ($AR) interface], > [am_cv_ar_interface], + [am_cv_ar_interface=ar > + AC_COMPILE_IFELSE([[int some_varia

Re: [PATCH] Add new 'AM_PROG_AR' macro, triggering the 'ar-lib' script.

Den 2010-09-14 20:14 skrev Stefano Lattarini: > On Tuesday 14 September 2010, Peter Rosin wrote: >> However, I have only updated tests/ar.test to cope with the new >> reality. So, a lot of tests (100?) are likely to fall over due to >> the new portability warnings. The reason is that I don't know o

Re: [PATCH] Add new 'AM_PROG_AR' macro, triggering the 'ar-lib' script.

Hi Stefano, Den 2010-09-15 01:45 skrev Stefano Lattarini: +: ${AR=ar} + +AC_CACHE_CHECK([the archiver ($AR) interface], [am_cv_ar_interface], + [am_cv_ar_interface=ar + AC_COMPILE_IFELSE([[int some_variable = 0;]], + [am_ar_try='$AR cru libconftest.a conftest.$