Re: Removing 'scriptversion' from our scripts

2012-03-06 Thread Stefano Lattarini
On 03/06/2012 10:06 PM, Peter Rosin wrote: > Stefano Lattarini skrev 2012-03-06 21:58: >> [re-adding the list] >> >> On 03/06/2012 09:18 PM, Peter Rosin wrote: You also forgot scriptversion... >>> >> True, but see below. >> >>> ...which is the reason this change should have been committed

Re: Removing 'scriptversion' from our scripts

2012-03-06 Thread Peter Rosin
Stefano Lattarini skrev 2012-03-06 21:58: > [re-adding the list] > > On 03/06/2012 09:18 PM, Peter Rosin wrote: >>> >>> You also forgot scriptversion... >> > True, but see below. > >> ...which is the reason this change should have been committed on msvc. >> Updating compile/depcomp/ar-lib on main

Removing 'scriptversion' from our scripts (was: Re: [PATCH] add xlc support to depcomp)

2012-03-06 Thread Stefano Lattarini
[re-adding the list] On 03/06/2012 09:18 PM, Peter Rosin wrote: >> >> You also forgot scriptversion... > True, but see below. > ...which is the reason this change should have been committed on msvc. > Updating compile/depcomp/ar-lib on maint destroys the rule saying > "newer is better". > But th

[FYI] {maint} news: describe recently-fixed bug in vala support

2012-03-06 Thread Stefano Lattarini
* NEWS (Long-standing bugs): Document fix for bug#10894, fixed by commit 'v1.11-696-g51f61df' of 27-02-2012. --- NEWS |5 + 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/NEWS b/NEWS index ffb4cb7..68d2929 100644 --- a/NEWS +++ b/NEWS @@ -146,6 +146,11 @@ Bugs fixed in 1.11

Re: [PATCH] add xlc support to depcomp

2012-03-06 Thread Stefano Lattarini
On 03/06/2012 07:47 PM, Michael wrote: > > My full name is: Michael Hofmann > Thanks. I've now pushed the attached patch in your name. I will try to take a look soonish at the failures you've reported. Thanks, Stefano >From 00ff60772869d54918d6d8a055110d61bad86220 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 Mes

Re: [PATCH] tests: do not clobber the modified CC

2012-03-06 Thread Stefano Lattarini
On 03/06/2012 02:23 PM, Peter Rosin wrote: > Stefano Lattarini skrev 2012-03-06 14:11: >> On 03/06/2012 01:53 PM, Peter Rosin wrote: >> Subject: [PATCH] tests: do not clobber the modified CC >> Maybe s|the modified CC|the $CC set by AM_PROG_CC_C_O (for losing compilers)| >> here? >> > >

Re: [PATCH] tests: do not clobber the modified CC

2012-03-06 Thread Peter Rosin
Stefano Lattarini skrev 2012-03-06 14:11: > On 03/06/2012 01:53 PM, Peter Rosin wrote: > >> > Subject: [PATCH] tests: do not clobber the modified CC >> > > Maybe s|the modified CC|the $CC set by AM_PROG_CC_C_O (for losing compilers)| > here? > Pushed with nits, but I dropped the "(for losing com

Re: [PATCH] tests: do not clobber the modified CC

2012-03-06 Thread Stefano Lattarini
On 03/06/2012 01:53 PM, Peter Rosin wrote: > Subject: [PATCH] tests: do not clobber the modified CC > Maybe s|the modified CC|the $CC set by AM_PROG_CC_C_O (for losing compilers)| here? > If CC is originally a losing compiler, AM_PROG_CC_C_O will > modify CC. "$MAKE -e" will then clobber this mo

[PATCH] tests: do not clobber the modified CC

2012-03-06 Thread Peter Rosin
If CC is originally a losing compiler, AM_PROG_CC_C_O will modify CC. "$MAKE -e" will then clobber this modified CC and reintroduce the raw losing compiler causing the test to fail, as subdir-objects is in effect. * tests/yacc-dist-nobuild-subdir.test: Drop -e from the $MAKE invocations. This is

Re: [PATCH] scripts: support -I -L and -l for cl in compile

2012-03-06 Thread Stefano Lattarini
On 03/06/2012 09:44 AM, Peter Rosin wrote: > > I made the changes and pushed, but it feels a bit hard to read -l${sp}foo > compared to -lfoo, so I'm not too happy about it. Oh well... > Thanks. Regards, Stefano

Re: [PATCH] tests: explicitly state that our lexers do not require unistd.h

2012-03-06 Thread Peter Rosin
Stefano Lattarini skrev 2012-03-06 09:03: > On 03/06/2012 08:45 AM, Peter Rosin wrote: >> Peter Rosin skrev 2012-03-06 08:38: >>> Stefano Lattarini skrev 2012-03-05 21:05: >>> I'd like to see a little addition squashed-in if you can: a new entry in 'tests/README' explaining that a "#defin

Re: [PATCH] scripts: support -I -L and -l for cl in compile

2012-03-06 Thread Peter Rosin
Stefano Lattarini skrev 2012-03-05 21:00: > On 03/05/2012 02:25 PM, Peter Rosin wrote: >> Hi! >> >> I noticed that some expect the compiler to accept a space between >> the option letter and the option argument. Looking at POSIX, this >> seems like an acceptable expectation, if not even preferred.

Re: [PATCH] tests: explicitly state that our lexers do not require unistd.h

2012-03-06 Thread Stefano Lattarini
On 03/06/2012 08:45 AM, Peter Rosin wrote: > Peter Rosin skrev 2012-03-06 08:38: >> Stefano Lattarini skrev 2012-03-05 21:05: >> >>> I'd like to see a little addition squashed-in if you can: a new >>> entry in 'tests/README' explaining that a "#define YY_NO_UNISTD_H" >>> is needed in lex input file