On 06/26/2012 04:56 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>>> AM_MISSING_PROG has been around for a while (git log says it was
>>> introduced in 1997, although the current two-argument version appears to
>>> date back to commit 9ae48df in Nov 1999), and seems like something
>>> stable enough to be worth gu
On 06/27/2012 03:55 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
> Addresses automake bug#11793.
>
> This macro has been present for a long time, and coreutils has been
> relying on it despite no documentation, which argues that it is stable
> enough to be worth documenting.
>
> Furthermore, since we are hoping to cha
Addresses automake bug#11793.
This macro has been present for a long time, and coreutils has been
relying on it despite no documentation, which argues that it is stable
enough to be worth documenting.
Furthermore, since we are hoping to change our preferred invocation
from 'missing --run program'
On 06/26/2012 04:32 AM, Bruno Haible wrote:
> Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>> I'm almost inclined not to do so, to force the affected
>> projects' broken setup to be fixed; i.e., if you are using Automake 1.11,
>> you let it install the correct 'missing' program, instead of forcing it
>> to use the 'mi
tags 11791 + patch
thanks
Hi Peter.
On 06/26/2012 01:56 PM, Peter Johansson wrote:
> Hello automakers,
>
> I've noticed the following behavior from 'make recheck'.
>
> If I run 'make check' and one test fails
>
> $ make check
> ...
> FAIL: foo.test
>
> I modify the test
>
> $ edit foo.
* t/subdir-order.sh: Run make in parallel only if the make implementation
truly supports it.
Signed-off-by: Stefano Lattarini
---
t/subdir-order.sh | 14 +-
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/t/subdir-order.sh b/t/subdir-order.sh
index 0321c25..4c843cf 10
