Re: [PATCH] {maint} Document in detail some limitations of aclocal.

Hallo Ralf, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: A problem to take into account is that if aclocal fails due to macro interaction for some user, she might not be able to do anything about it (because she is not root) thus making the whole installation a bit unusable. Unless I'm misunderstanding, then I disa

Re: [PATCH] {maint} Document in detail some limitations of aclocal.

Hello, * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Thu, Nov 04, 2010 at 08:47:47PM CET: > I've gone ahead and documented this non-obvious limitation, and another > similar one regarding AC_DEFUN. See the attached patch. > > Ralf, ok to apply to maint? There are a couple of things I don't like with the princip

Re: [PATCH] {maint} Document in detail some limitations of aclocal.

On 2010-11-04 22:28 +0100, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > On Thursday 04 November 2010, Nick Bowler wrote: > > On 2010-11-04 20:47 +0100, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > > > +AC_DEFUN([MY_DEFUN], [m4_apply([AC_DEFUN], [$1], [$2])]) > > > > This is insufficiently quoted, it should be: > >

Re: [PATCH] {maint} Document in detail some limitations of aclocal. (was: Re: Strangeness with m4_include and aclocal.)

On 2010-11-04 20:47 +0100, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > On Thursday 28 October 2010, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > > On Wednesday 27 October 2010, Nick Bowler wrote: > > > On 2010-10-23 15:23 +0200, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > > > > So I think your first problem is "just" an aclocal limitation we should

Re: [PATCH] {maint} Document in detail some limitations of aclocal.

Hi Stefano, Stefano Lattarini wrote: +Due to both intrinsic and historical reasons, @command{aclocal} is +far from perfect. The most noteworthy limitation, which macro authors +and @command{aclocal} users should always be aware of, is that +...@command{aclocal} (in contrast to e.g.@: @command{a

Re: [PATCH] {maint} Document in detail some limitations of aclocal.

Hmpf, I sent the old patch by mistake, instead of the amended one. The attached patch should now be the correct one. Sorry for the noise, Stefano From a62a906808d3e43ac8a7c396412f545ce3588118 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Stefano Lattarini Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2010 20:12:59 +0100 Subject: [PATCH]

Re: tests updates

On Thursday 04 November 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Thu, Nov 04, 2010 at 01:03:17PM CET: > > On Wednesday 03 November 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 02:27:47PM CET: > > > > Just one question: what about the alread

Re: [PATCH] {maint} Document in detail some limitations of aclocal.

Hi Eric. On Thursday 04 November 2010, Eric Blake wrote: > On 11/04/2010 03:28 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > >>> +# Indirection used here, to avoid triggering the bug described > >>> +# above. > >>> +AC_DEFUN([MY_DEFUN], [m4_apply([AC_DEFUN], [$1], [$2])]) > >> > >> This is insufficiently quoted,

Re: [PATCH] {maint} Document in detail some limitations of aclocal.

On Thursday 04 November 2010, Nick Bowler wrote: > On 2010-11-04 22:28 +0100, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > > On Thursday 04 November 2010, Nick Bowler wrote: > > > On 2010-11-04 20:47 +0100, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > > > > +AC_DEFUN([MY_DEFUN], [m4_apply([AC_DEFUN], [$1], [$2])]) > > > > > > This i

Re: [PATCH] {maint} Document in detail some limitations of aclocal.

On 11/04/2010 03:28 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >>> +# Indirection used here, to avoid triggering the bug described >>> +# above. >>> +AC_DEFUN([MY_DEFUN], [m4_apply([AC_DEFUN], [$1], [$2])]) >> >> This is insufficiently quoted, it should be: >> [m4_apply([AC_DEFUN], [[$1],

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

On Thursday 04 November 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 08:47:54PM CET: > > Also, you said that this patch was somewhat invasive and required some > > more testing, so I did the all the testsing I could before asking for > > the final blessing: > >

Re: [PATCH] {maint} Document in detail some limitations of aclocal.

[dropping autom...@gnu.org] On Thursday 04 November 2010, Nick Bowler wrote: > On 2010-11-04 20:47 +0100, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > > On Thursday 28 October 2010, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > > > On Wednesday 27 October 2010, Nick Bowler wrote: > > > > On 2010-10-23 15:23 +0200, Stefano Lattarini w

Re: More problems with `make -n' in automake-generated rules.

On Thursday 04 November 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Thu, Nov 04, 2010 at 09:50:08PM CET: > > On Thursday 04 November 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 06:48:16PM CET: > > > > Hello Ralf. Again, just a couple of nits

Re: [PATCH] aclocal: handle ACLOCAL_PATH environment variable

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Thu, Nov 04, 2010 at 10:03:27PM CET: > On Thursday 04 November 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 04:24:51PM CET: > > > Shouldn't we use `...@path_separator@' here instead of `:', for better > > > portability to windows? >

Re: More problems with `make -n' in automake-generated rules.

On Thursday 04 November 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 06:48:16PM CET: > > Hello Ralf. Again, just a couple of nits w.r.t. the test cases... > > Thanks; but I didn't mean to actually commit the second patch > (just in case that wasn't clear). I di

Re: [PATCH] aclocal: handle ACLOCAL_PATH environment variable

On Thursday 04 November 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 04:24:51PM CET: > > On Tuesday 02 November 2010, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > + # Add any directory listed in the `ACLOCAL_PATH' environment > > > + # variable. > > > + if (defined $ENV{"ACLOCA

Re: More problems with `make -n' in automake-generated rules.

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Thu, Nov 04, 2010 at 09:50:08PM CET: > On Thursday 04 November 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 06:48:16PM CET: > > > Hello Ralf. Again, just a couple of nits w.r.t. the test cases... > > > > Thanks; but I didn't mean

Re: [PATCH] aclocal: handle ACLOCAL_PATH environment variable

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 04:24:51PM CET: > On Tuesday 02 November 2010, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > + # Add any directory listed in the `ACLOCAL_PATH' environment > > + # variable. > > + if (defined $ENV{"ACLOCAL_PATH"}) > > +{ > > + foreach my $dir (split /:/, $EN

Re: More problems with `make -n' in automake-generated rules.

On Thursday 04 November 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > Hi Stefano, > > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 06:30:34PM CET: > > On Monday 01 November 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > > I noticed more issues with automake-generated rules and `make -n': > > > > > > 1) The solutions doc

Re: More problems with `make -n' in automake-generated rules.

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 06:48:16PM CET: > Hello Ralf. Again, just a couple of nits w.r.t. the test cases... Thanks; but I didn't mean to actually commit the second patch (just in case that wasn't clear). That said, I'll reply to your comments inline. > On Monday 01 Nov

Re: More problems with `make -n' in automake-generated rules.

Hi Stefano, * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 06:30:34PM CET: > On Monday 01 November 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > I noticed more issues with automake-generated rules and `make -n': > > > > 1) The solutions documented in the `Multiple Outputs' node are not safe > > for use wit

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

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 08:47:54PM CET: > On Wednesday 03 November 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 03:10:30PM CET: > > > Pinging the patch again, following this: > > > > > >

[PATCH] {maint} Document in detail some limitations of aclocal. (was: Re: Strangeness with m4_include and aclocal.)

On Thursday 28 October 2010, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > On Wednesday 27 October 2010, Nick Bowler wrote: > > On 2010-10-23 15:23 +0200, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > > > So I think your first problem is "just" an aclocal limitation we should > > > resign to live with. But I also think that such a lim

Re: tests updates

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Thu, Nov 04, 2010 at 01:03:17PM CET: > On Wednesday 03 November 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 02:27:47PM CET: > > > Just one question: what about the already-existing "tests-init" branch? > > > Should I try to bring i

Re: tests updates

On Wednesday 03 November 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 02:27:47PM CET: > > On Monday 01 November 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > > I'm so totally behind on patches and not getting better, that the > > > strategy of ignoring testsuite work will not