Re: bug#9768: Makefile broken after removing included *.am file

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 10:20:05AM CEST: > On Sunday 16 October 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > What happens if I write > > include fragment-with-typo-in-name.am > > > > but I want that fragment included? > > > I fear I cannot par

Re: [RFC] Releasing automake 1.11.2

Hello Stefano, * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 05:44:14PM CEST: > I think it's about time to release automake 1.11.2 -- the `maint' > branch contains various bug fixes w.r.t. the 1.11.1 release (some > of them quite important), and offers some new small features and > various war

Re: bug#9768: Makefile broken after removing included *.am file

Hello, * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 08:27:12PM CEST: > On Sunday 15 November 2009, Peter Johansson wrote: > > make: *** No rule to make target `aminclude.am', needed by > > `Makefile.in'. Stop. > > > > This is very similar to the "deleted header file problem" for *.m4 files

Re: [PATCH] tests: simplify wrapper for aclocal

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 05:47:41PM CEST: > On Sunday 04 September 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 09:58:27PM CEST: > > > * tests/aclocal.in: Remove use of $ACLOCAL_TESTSUITE_FLAGS and > > > ext

Re: [PATCH] tests: simplify wrapper for aclocal

Hi Stefano, * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 09:58:27PM CEST: > * tests/aclocal.in: Remove use of $ACLOCAL_TESTSUITE_FLAGS and > extra `-I' flags; they are not really required, since the file > `m4/amversion.m4' is generated in the srcdir anyway. > * tests/acloca10.test: Remove us

Re: [FYI] {master} gitignore: more use of anchors

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 05:04:16PM CEST: > On Tuesday 09 August 2011, Eric Blake wrote: > > On 08/09/2011 08:44 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > > > * .gitignore: Anchor files that are intended to be ignored only > > > if found in the same directory of the `.gitignore' file,

Re: [PATCH 8/5] tap: support colorization of testsuite progress output

> On Tuesday 19 July 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > Below is what I've squashed in. OK? Sure, thanks! > --- a/lib/tap-driver > +++ b/lib/tap-driver > @@ -230,17 +230,24 @@ sub colored ($$) > > sub decorate_result ($) > { > - return $_[0] unless $cfg{&q

Re: [PATCH 1/5] {test-protocols} parallel-tests: make parsing of test results safer

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 10:05:14PM CEST: > Hi Ralf, thanks for the tips. Rather, 5 minutes of searching the web. But sure, anytime. ;-) > On Tuesday 19 July 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > Test suite environments: > > any that use the above > >

Re: [PATCH 8/5] tap: support colorization of testsuite progress output

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 11:47:21AM CEST: > On Monday 18 July 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > > + grn => '[0;32m', > > > + lgn => '[1;32m', > > > + blu => '[1;34m', > > > + mgn =

Re: [PATCH 1/5] {test-protocols} parallel-tests: make parsing of test results safer

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 11:54:09AM CEST: > > Please, this is really important: we need to research the other test > > protocols, what they do to be robust here. Don't NIH here, because the > > experience we have is not enough to not mess up this. Consider this > > resear

Re: [PATCH 2/5] {test-protocols} parallel-tests: new recognized test result 'ERROR'

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 11:38:18AM CEST: > On Monday 18 July 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 12:37:07AM CEST: > > > + - The parallel-tests harness has a new test result 'ERROR', that can be &

Re: [PATCH 8/5] tap: support colorization of testsuite progress output

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 10:30:56AM CEST: > * lib/tap-driver (%COLORS): New variable (definition extracted > from `lib/am/check.am:$(am__tty_colors)', with some obvious > adjustments. > (report): Adjust to colorize console output when required, > using ... > (decorate_resul

Re: [PATCH 5/5] {test-protocols} tap: add experimental TAP-aware driver

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 10:17:01AM CEST: > On Friday 15 July 2011, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > > * doc/automake.texi (Using the TAP test protocol): New section. > > (Overview of Custom Test Drivers Support): Minor updates. > > * lib/tap-driver: New script, TAP-aware test dr

Re: [PATCH 7/5] tap: some preparatory refactoring (2)

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 10:28:33AM CEST: > * lib/tap-driver (console_output): Renamed ... > (report): ... to this, and extended to appropriately register > the test results when needed. > (testsuite_error, handle_tap_comment, handle_tap_test, > handle_tap_plan): Adjusted a

Re: [PATCH 4/5] {test-protocols} tests defs: new auxiliary function 'count_test_results'

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 12:38:57AM CEST: > * tests/defs (count_test_results): New function. > * tests/check11.test: Use it. > * tests/test-driver-custom-multitest.test: Likewise. > * tests/test-driver-custom-multitest-recheck.test: Likewise. > * tests/test-driver-custom-mu

Re: [PATCH 2/5] {test-protocols} parallel-tests: new recognized test result 'ERROR'

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 12:37:07AM CEST: > * lib/am/check.am ($(TEST_SUITE_LOG)): Recognize a new test result > `ERROR'. Use it when encountering unreadable test logs (previously > a simple `FAIL' was used in this situations). > * lib/test-driver: Set the global test resu

Re: [PATCH 1/5] {test-protocols} parallel-tests: make parsing of test results safer

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 12:36:17AM CEST: > The new code for parsing the testsuite-generated `.log' files, > as introduced in commit `v1.11-872-gc96b881', considers each > `:test-result:' field anywhere in a `.log' file as a declaration > of a test result, and accounts for

Re: [GSoC] Some patches for testsuite harness improvements and TAP support introduction

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 12:35:02AM CEST: > The patches I'm going to post in this thread have already been applied > to the 'GSoC/experimental/test-results-work' temporary branch, but now > I think they are mature enough to be moved to the "official" branch > 'test-protocol

Re: [PATCH] docs: Add references between the 2 sections on compiling Java.

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 03:18:28PM CEST: > From: Benoit Sigoure > Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 16:49:45 -0700 > Subject: [PATCH] docs: add references between the 2 sections on java support > > * doc/automake.texi (Java Support, Java): Add cross-references. Nice one, thanks.

Re: [PATCH] {testsuite-work} tests: fix typos, grammaros and other blunders in comments

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 02:30:40PM CEST: > A patch doing various (mostly cosmetic) fixes to comments in tests. > Before pushing, I'll allow 72 hours for comments and suggestsions. OK thanks. > Subject: [PATCH] tests: fix typos, grammaros and other blunders in comments >

Re: [PATCH] {GSoC} parallel-tests: simplify testsuite summary

On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 07:02:58PM +0200, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > On Wednesday 06 July 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > But tools like autobuild have another requirement: they would like to be > > able to detect, as reliably as possible, some statistics based on > > whateve

Re: [PATCH] {GSoC} parallel-tests: simplify testsuite summary

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 02:49:15PM CEST: > On Wednesday 06 July 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sun, Jul 03, 2011 at 03:31:22PM CEST: > > > Prefer a more deterministic, "tabular" format for the testsuite >

Re: bug#8969: improve synchronization between examples in the manual and test cases

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 10:32:56AM CEST: > Oops, sorry. Fixed by the attached patch. OK for maint? I'll wait > the customary 72 hours before pushing. Thanks. OK, but please remove all the comments about tar unportability in the tests. It's so obvious. ;-) (and there

Re: bug#8969: improve synchronization between examples in the manual and test cases

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Fri, Jul 01, 2011 at 12:59:53AM CEST: > Subject: [PATCH] docs, tests: synchronize examples from docs to tests > > * tests/README (Writing test cases): Give suggestions on how to > keep test cases and examples in the documentation synchronized. > * doc/automake.texi: Im

Re: [PATCH] {GSoC} parallel-tests: simplify testsuite summary

Hi Stefano, * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sun, Jul 03, 2011 at 03:31:22PM CEST: > Prefer a more deterministic, "tabular" format for the testsuite > summary, always listing the numbers of passed, failed, xfailed, > xpassed, skipped and errored tests, even when these numbers are > zero. This simplif

Re: [PATCH] {GSoC} tests defs: new auxiliary function 'count_test_results'

Hi Stefano, and sorry for yet another delay, * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 10:00:25PM CEST: > Posted below is a patch that I'll soon apply to the temporary branch > 'GSoC/experimental/test-results-work'; it is aimed at reducing code > duplication a bit in the current testsuite,

Re: [FYI] {master} docs: fix unportable example of AM_TESTS_ENVIRONMENT usage

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 10:45:02PM CEST: > On Thursday 30 June 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > I'm fairly sure that's only with historic shells and not an > > issue in practice any more (Sven Mascheck's pages will have the details > &g

Re: [MERGE REQUEST] merge patches for AM_TESTSUITE_ENVIRONMENT into maint

* Ralf Wildenhues wrote on Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 10:52:16PM CEST: > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 05:12:38PM CEST: > > I think that the patches introducing support for AM_TESTSUITE_ENVIRONMENT > > should be merged into maint, as they'd make a nice addition

Re: [PATCH] parallel-tests: new recognized test result 'ERROR'

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 04:58:21PM CEST: > I've applied the attached patch to the 'GSoC/experimental/test-results-work' > branch Note that this is not an FYI, since that branch is temporary, and can > thus be amended and modified. Reviews are welcome! Just a couple of q

Re: [MERGE REQUEST] merge patches for AM_TESTSUITE_ENVIRONMENT into maint

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 05:12:38PM CEST: > I think that the patches introducing support for AM_TESTSUITE_ENVIRONMENT > should be merged into maint, as they'd make a nice addition for 1.11.2. > I've verified that almost all these patches are based off of maint, and > the fe

Re: [FYI] {master} docs: fix unportable example of AM_TESTS_ENVIRONMENT usage

Hi Stefano, * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 10:56:31PM CEST: > On Thursday 23 June 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > > -AM_TESTS_ENVIRONMENT = exec 9>&2; warn_fileno=9; export warn_fileno; > > > > This example served two purposes: use of AM_TESTS_E

Re: [PATCH] {master} coverage: new test on parallel-tests TESTS runtime overriding

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 04:40:51PM CEST: > I'd like to add this new test case to master. OK? Sure, note typo below. This could actually find bugs in older makes, but hey, we'd want to know about them. Thanks, Ralf > Subject: [PATCH] coverage: new test on parallel-test

Re: [PATCH] docs: avoid a footnote, some related rewordings and improvements (was: Re: [Automake-commit] [SCM] GNU Automake branch, maint, updated. v1.11-393-gc1040a7)

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 08:24:13AM CEST: > On Monday 27 June 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > Sure. Well, do they use some format already? > > > Well, there are only two of them, and both follows this format: > > @c The test case for the setu

Re: [FYI] {parallel-tests-maint} docs: parallel-tests is not experimental anymore

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 03:48:58PM CEST: > On Monday 27 June 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 09:32:53AM CEST: > > > Subject: [PATCH] Revert "docs: parallel-tests is not experimental anymore&quo

Re: [FYI] New public temporary branch, about documentation for custom test drivers

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 01:11:51PM CEST: > On Monday 27 June 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 02:20:48PM CEST: > > > +The @code{AM_TESTS_ENVIRONMENT} and @code{TESTS_ENVIRONMENT} variables > > >

Re: [PATCH] docs: avoid a footnote, some related rewordings and improvements (was: Re: [Automake-commit] [SCM] GNU Automake branch, maint, updated. v1.11-393-gc1040a7)

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 03:35:23PM CEST: > On Monday 27 June 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > > +@c The following example should be covered by the test case > > > +@c 'autodist-config-headers.test'. > > > > @c The foll

Re: [FYI] {parallel-tests-maint} docs: parallel-tests is not experimental anymore

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 09:32:53AM CEST: > Subject: [PATCH] Revert "docs: parallel-tests is not experimental anymore" > > This reverts commit a9eef973b5ea47cc3495f1a8307d4f7b85aea46f. > > It turned out that the current work to introduce TAP and SubUnit > support in Autom

Re: [PATCH] docs: avoid a footnote, some related rewordings and improvements (was: Re: [Automake-commit] [SCM] GNU Automake branch, maint, updated. v1.11-393-gc1040a7)

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:33:41PM CEST: > On Thursday 23 June 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > Footnotes are hard to read and distract the flow, esp. in an info file. > > > Sorry, I never use info(1) directly (never bothered to learn it actually); Ac

Re: [FYI] New public temporary branch, about documentation for custom test drivers

Hi Stefano, * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 02:20:48PM CEST: > I've pushed the documentation work I've done so far to the temporary > public branch "GSoC/experimental/docs-custom-test-drivers", in case > anyone wants to take a look at it (I had hoped to finish it this morning, >

Re: [Automake-commit] [SCM] GNU Automake branch, maint, updated. v1.11-393-gc1040a7

[ from automake-commit ] since I didn't review the source patch yet: * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:03:52AM CEST: > --- a/doc/automake.texi > +++ b/doc/automake.texi > @@ -8293,7 +8293,9 @@ as are all @file{Makefile.am}s and @file{Makefile.in}s. > Automake also > has a bu

Re: [FYI] {master} docs: fix unportable example of AM_TESTS_ENVIRONMENT usage

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 07:09:16PM CEST: > * doc/automake.texi (Simple Tests using parallel-tests): The > old example on AM_TESTS_ENVIRONMENT relied on unportable shell > features, and in particular didn't work with various Korn > Shells (see also commit `v1.11-925-g29ca90

Re: [FYI] {maint} docs: minor cosmetic fixes

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 06:40:25PM CEST: > * doc/automake.texi: Break few overly long lines, throughout the > file. > ("Simple Tests"): Move @vindex for XFAIL_TESTS to the correct > position, i.e., before and not after the paragraph where it is > introduced. > ("Options" @

Re: [PATCH] {test-protocols} parallel-tests: fix bug in Automake's own testsuite

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 09:52:55AM CEST: > On Wednesday 22 June 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > Also, have you thought about a quoting mechanism so that test authors do > > not have to think about breaking the test driver mechanism accidentally? > >

Re: [PATCH] {test-protocols} parallel-tests: fix bug in Automake's own testsuite

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 09:52:13PM CEST: > The first bugfix in the new branch. Luckily, the bug (detailedly > described in the ChangeLog entry) is only in the Automake's own > testsuite, not in the implementation. You could halven the length of the log entry without loss

Re: [PATCH] {maint} remake: behave better with non-GNU make in subdirectories

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 10:43:06PM CEST: > On Tuesday 21 June 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sun, May 29, 2011 at 04:26:36PM CEST: > > > --- a/lib/am/configure.am > > > +++ b/lib/am/configure.am > > > @

Re: [PATCH] {maint} remake: behave better with non-GNU make in subdirectories

What's more: have you tried this patch on a nontrivial source tree (where regenerating takes more than a second or so) with a few non-GNU makes and GNU make? I kinda fear that it can cause an endless regen loop. It might actually be smarter to use some newer BSD make features to mark Makefile as

Re: [PATCH] {maint} remake: behave better with non-GNU make in subdirectories

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sun, May 29, 2011 at 04:26:36PM CEST: > --- a/lib/am/configure.am > +++ b/lib/am/configure.am > @@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ > ## %MAKEFILE% is updated before considering the am--refresh target. The comment up here ^^^ needs to be updated in this particular patch. > if %?TOPDI

Re: [PATCHES v5] Allow custom testsuite drivers in Automake

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 09:22:42PM CEST: > Hopefully the last iteration of the patches. A follow-up for > extending and fixing the documentation will go in a new thread. Can you push your branch for this to a branch in the savannah git? I'd like to take another look at t

Re: [FYI] {maint} maintcheck: avoid few spurious failures

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 09:53:19AM CEST: > On Tuesday 21 June 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 11:59:57PM CEST: > > > On Monday 20 June 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > > > * Stefano Lattarini

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tests: make test runner a script, not a shell function

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 11:12:23PM CEST: > Maybe we should also say that using TESTS_ENVIRONMENT to define a custom > test runner is now not only strongly deprecated (as it already was I hope), No it wasn't. "test runner" is not a term I would recognize, btw. > but also

Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] parallel-tests: allow each test to have multiple results

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:58:05PM CEST: > On Monday 20 June 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > For example the parallel BSD makes tend to reuse shells for running > > the recipe commands; > > > But only for the commands in the same recipe, right? I

Re: [FYI] {maint} maintcheck: avoid few spurious failures

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 11:59:57PM CEST: > On Monday 20 June 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 05:05:45PM CEST: > > > sc_tests_plain_automake: > > > - @if grep -v '^#&#

Re: [FYI] {maint} maintcheck: avoid few spurious failures

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 05:05:45PM CEST: > * Makefile.am (sc_tests_plain_aclocal, sc_tests_plain_perl, > sc_tests_plain_autoconf, sc_tests_plain_automake, > sc_tests_plain_autoupate): Be stricter in matching an erroneous > literal command, i.e., `aclocal', `automake', `per

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tests: make test runner a script, not a shell function

* Jim Meyering wrote on Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:29:50PM CEST: > Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > One thing I've regularly done with new code that is not 100% backward > > compatible is have a new Automake option for them. That is exactly why > > there is a 'parallel-tes

Re: [PATCH] check: don't use multi-line coloring for the report

* Ralf Wildenhues wrote on Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:29:02PM CEST: > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:33:53AM CEST: > > +# Prefix each line by 'col' and terminate each with 'std', for coloring. > > +# Multi line coloring is problematic with &qu

Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] parallel-tests: allow each test to have multiple results

Hi Stefano, * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:26:06PM CEST: > On Monday 20 June 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > Why not just split the whole documentation change into a followup patch > > then? > > > Because that would only postpone, not avoid, th

Re: [PATCH] check: don't use multi-line coloring for the report

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:33:53AM CEST: > OK, I've amended the patch on Bert's behalf, as he can't do that himself > at the moment. Attached is what I've pushed (to maint). Thanks for handling this, and to Bert for the report and patch! Minor nit: > --- a/lib/am/check

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tests: make test runner a script, not a shell function

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:22:28AM CEST: > [Adding bug-grep, dropping bug-coreutils and automake-patches] re-adding the latter. > I've noticed that grep uses a definition of TESTS_ENVIRONMENT very similar > to that of coreutils (the one we've just fixed), so it will brea

Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] parallel-tests: allow each test to have multiple results

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 09:33:13AM CEST: > On Friday 17 June 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > > Actually, why not s/testcase/test/g globally in all your text. > > > Because I'm trying to make a distinction between test scripts and > test case

Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] parallel-tests: allow each test to have multiple results

* Ralf Wildenhues wrote on Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 08:37:59AM CEST: > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 10:03:59AM CEST: > > The implementation makes use of a custom reStructuredText field > > `:am-testcase-result:'. > > Why an Automake-specific name here

Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] parallel-tests: allow each test to have multiple results

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 10:03:59AM CEST: > With this change, we improve the code creating the `test-suite.log' > global log and the console testsuite summary to make it able to > grasp multiple results per test script. This is required in order > to introduce the pl

Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] parallel-tests: add auxiliary script 'pt-driver', refactor

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 10:00:31AM CEST: > This refactoring should cause no API of functionality change, > and is meant only to simplify the future implementation of TAP > and SubUnit testsuite drivers. More precisely, our roadmap is > to move most of the "testsuite drivi

Re: [PATCH] check: don't use multi-line coloring for the report

Hello, * Bert Wesarg wrote on Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 08:19:23PM CEST: > the parallel part is a little trickier. Because the line printing is > done by awk. I would like to know, whether it is portable to use the > printf function of awk. It is POSIX, but you may know that this > doesn't count much.

Re: [PATCH] {maint} distcheck: add support for AM_DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 05:33:39PM CEST: > > On Thursday 02 June 2011, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > > Continuing with the good trend of avoiding to impinge on the user > > namespace, we should start supporting AM_DISTCHECK

Re: name of new pt-driver script

[ adding the -patches list; sorry for appearing from the blue, the rest of the discussion really was not really ontopic ... ] [ about the TAP/subunit proposal ] * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 06:09:25PM CEST: > On Monday 13 June 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > &

Re: [REQUEST] Public temporary & rewindable branches for GSoC features

Hi Stefano, * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 05:55:02PM CEST: > Would be ok with you if in the future I create some temporary branches > *in the automake official repository* that I can rebase, edit, and delete > at will? I don't mind, as long as they are marked/documented as suc

Re: Patch reviews

Hello guys, On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 09:25:33AM +0200, Peter Rosin wrote: > Now that Ralf is doing something else for a while, Thanks for the roses. After moving twice within 5 weeks (and generally having far too little time), things should gradually improve as soon as I have a landline internet

Re: [FYI] {maint} tests/README: update obsoleted advice

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Fri, May 20, 2011 at 10:21:09PM CEST: > * tests/README (Section "Writing test cases" subsection "Do"): > Do not suggest to use the `*-p.test' pattern for the names of > hand-written tests which use the `parallel-tests' Automake option. > Not only is this not respected b

Re: {testsuite-work} [PATCH] tests: avoid spurious failures in cross-compile mode

Hi Stefano, * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, May 18, 2011 at 06:19:55PM CEST: > I will wait until tomorrow for a review, before pushing. I really don't have the time to do a close review right now, but can you use 'native' instead of 'non-cross' and go ahead with that? That would fit the lingo

Re: [FYI] {maint} testsuite: be more cross-compile friendly

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sun, May 15, 2011 at 03:48:43PM CEST: > I've applied the attached patch to 'maint', rather than to 'testsuite-work', > only to make it easier to (potentially) backport tests for future bugfixing. > I plan to check in fixes tests that don't currently work in cross-compil

Re: [FYI] {parallel-tests-maint} docs: parallel-tests is not experimental anymore

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sun, May 15, 2011 at 04:10:29PM CEST: > On Sunday 15 May 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > Well, the point of declaring it experimental is being able to do at > > least slightly incompatible changes and mostly getting away with it. > > > > Th

Re: [FYI] {parallel-tests-maint} docs: parallel-tests is not experimental anymore

Hi Stefano, * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, May 11, 2011 at 04:07:46PM CEST: > The parallel-tests driver has now been used quite extensively > by a fair number of real-world applications (e.g., GNU coreutils, > GNU libtool, GNU grep, and various packages using Gnulib), and > thus exposed to adeq

Re: [FYI] {maint} tests: fix spurious failure of txinfo21.test on FreeBSD

[ apologies if you receive this multiple times ] Hi Stefano, * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sat, May 07, 2011 at 03:02:02PM CEST: > * tests/txinfo21.test: Use the `is_newest' subroutine instead of > the `ls -t' hack to to determine whether a file has been updated. > This is required because at leas

Re: [PATCH] java: allow both dist_JAVA and nodist_JAVA in the same Makefile.am

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 09:10:49AM CEST: > On Wednesday 20 April 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > I expect to be able for some review on Friday, maybe on Thursday after > > that, and then hopefully on March 3. > > > I guess you mean May 3 here. Ye

Re: [PATCH] java: allow both dist_JAVA and nodist_JAVA in the same Makefile.am

Hello Stefano, * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 09:35:52PM CEST: > I'll push in 72 hours if there is no objection. I expect to be able for some review on Friday, maybe on Thursday after that, and then hopefully on March 3. There might be occasions in between, but if you want to

Re: New release wishlist

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 12:07:14PM CEST: > JFTR, here are the things that IMHO we must do for the next release: Right now, I'm aiming at 1.11.2, not 1.12. The minimum for the former is *no* additional features. The important thing is no regressions, not really any new f

Re: [PATCH] test defs: don't allow `$me' to be overridden from the environment

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 09:26:30PM CEST: > On Monday 18 April 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 12:33:25AM CEST: > > > Subject: [PATCH] test defs: don't allow `$me' to be overridden

Re: [PATCH] test defs: don't allow `$me' to be overridden from the environment

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 12:33:25AM CEST: > Subject: [PATCH] test defs: don't allow `$me' to be overridden from the > environment > > * tests/defs.in ($me): Use the namespace-safe `$am_test_name' (if > it's nonempty) as the default for the initialization of `$me', so > th

Re: [FYI] {maint,master} test defs: allow overriding of `$me'

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:27:04AM CEST: > On Monday 18 April 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 09:36:42PM CEST: > > > > > > <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/automake-patches/2011-0

Re: [FYI] {maint,master} test defs: allow overriding of `$me'

Hi Stefano, * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 09:36:42PM CEST: > On Sunday 17 April 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > > am_test_name is better, but doesn't explain either why it would be > > needed in the first place. > > > Second patch of: >

Re: [FYI] {maint,master} test defs: allow overriding of `$me'

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 09:08:54PM CEST: > On Sunday 17 April 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > Otherwise you will have spurious failures (and to some extent > > "arbitrary code execution" upon a testsuite run). > > > What about initil

Re: [FYI] {maint,master} test defs: allow overriding of `$me'

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 06:27:44PM CEST: > Subject: [PATCH] test defs: allow overriding of `$me' > > * tests/defs.in ($me): Allow overriding by the including test > script. Add some explicative comments. What if the user environment contains $me? Will that be overridde

Re: [PATCH] {maint} tests: new subroutines for test skipping/failing

Hello Stefano, * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 03:27:17PM CEST: > Reference: > > > On Wednesday 30 March 2011, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > > > > > $(AM_TESTS_SETUP) $(TESTS_SETUP) $(TESTS_ENVIRONMENT)

Re: bug#8508: 8 test failures on Fedora 15

Hi Jim, * Jim Meyering wrote on Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 11:59:33AM CEST: > Subject: [PATCH] depcomp: correct invalid sed invocation > > * lib/depcomp: Insert missing -e before '/:$/d'. > Otherwise, that use of sed would treat '/:$/d' as a file name. Thanks. Merged from the 'fix-depcomp' branch int

Re: [FYI] {yacc-work} coverage: test for automake bug#8485 (known regression)

Hello Stefano, * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 03:26:33PM CEST: > I've pushed the attached patch to yacc-work. The new testcase > should correctly capture and expose the regression, as it passes > with automake 1.11 and fails with developement (maint, master > and yacc-work) ver

Re: bug#8473: depcomp bug with HP-UX cc and VPATH build

Hi Stefano, * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 12:29:51PM CEST: > On Monday 11 April 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > > I've spotted a couple of harmful typos in the patch, and I also > > > have a very minor nit. > > > > You'd do me a big

Re: [FYI] maint merged into yacc-work

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 05:33:47PM CEST: > The yacc-work branch, due to its slow advancing pace, was falling more > and more out of sync with maint, and thus with all the improvements > and bug fixings done there in the meantime. Since yacc-work is meant > to be eventual

Re: bug#8473: depcomp bug with HP-UX cc and VPATH build

Hi Stefano, > I've spotted a couple of harmful typos in the patch, and I also > have a very minor nit. You'd do me a big favor if you fixed them right away (if you have time) and merge to active branches. I don't have my ssh keys available until tonight. Thanks, and sorry for the messup, Ralf

Re: bug#8473: depcomp bug with HP-UX cc and VPATH build

* Ralf Wildenhues wrote on Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 07:13:00AM CEST: > Fix hp depmode for VPATH builds with GNU make. > > * lib/depcomp: Be sure to remove VPATH-prefixed object from > dependency output when creating stub rule. > * tests/depcomp10.test: New test

Re: bug#8473: depcomp bug with HP-UX cc and VPATH build

Hi Bruno, * Bruno Haible wrote on Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 02:44:48AM CEST: > The dependencies mechanism of Automake leads to a compilation failure when > used in a VPATH build (with GNU make, of course) Actually, in this case you could have avoided this particular bug by using HP make. :-p Automak

Re: [PATCH] {yacc-work} coverage: test mixed C/C++ yacc-generated parsers in the same dir

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 03:34:12PM CEST: > Or, since we are doing both VPATH an in-tree builds, just continue > with serial make if `-j' doesn't work. See the attached squash-in > (which goes on the top of the previous squash-in). OK? OK. Thanks!

Re: [PATCH] {yacc-work} coverage: test mixed C/C++ yacc-generated parsers in the same dir

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 02:50:28PM CEST: > On Sunday 10 April 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > I think it would make sense to also do parallel build tests here > > > Agreed (and BTW this uncovered a bug in the testcase: I had forgotten > to add `p

Re: [PATCH] {yacc-work} coverage: test mixed C/C++ yacc-generated parsers in the same dir

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 12:57:26PM CEST: > A final testcase I'd like to check in before submitting the final > patch for automake bug#7648 and PR automake/491 (patch not yet > complete ATM, but I think I'm almost there). It checks that many > different Yacc parsers (both

Re: [PATCH] cosmetics: fix typos and wording in some yacc tests

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 11:17:10AM CEST: > On Sunday 10 April 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > While at it, you might want to fix > I've fixed that, plus some similar blunders, and added a few other > misc fixlets too. The resulting patch is attache

Re: [PATCH 1/2] yacc: update NEWS w.r.t. Yacc-generated headers extesions

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 10:46:33AM CEST: > OK for yacc-work? I will push in 72 hours if there is no objection. OK with nits addressed. You can squash both changes together. > Subject: [PATCH 1/2] yacc: update NEWS w.r.t. Yacc-generated headers extesions > --- a/NEWS >

Re: bug#7648: [PATCH] {yacc-work} yacc: extension of headers modelled after extension of sources

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 10:26:40AM CEST: > > > > Related to automake bug#7648 and PR automake/491. > > > > * lib/am/yacc.am (am__yacc_c2h): New internal variable. > > (?GENERIC?%EXT%%DERIVED-EXT%

Re: [PATCH] {maint} test defs: new requirement for the default java compiler

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 10:23:11AM CEST: > On Sunday 10 April 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > Hmm. Did you test this though? > > > Yes, but I only have javac 1.6.0 on my system, which works even with > just the `-version' option: Oh, ok. >

Re: [PATCH] {maint} test defs: new requirement for the default java compiler

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 09:50:14AM CEST: > Thanks for the fast review, >Stefano Hmm. Did you test this though? The tests are all skipping for me now now, but I have javac installed: SKIP: instdir-java.test (exit: 77) == /tmp/build/t

Re: [PATCH] {maint} test defs: new requirement for the default java compiler

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 09:11:07AM CEST: > IMHO having a proper requirement for the java compiler in `tests/defs' > would be better than the current behaviour running the check for the > availability of javac in the generated configure script in each > relevant test. And

Re: bug#8234: check_JAVA built during make

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 06:52:24PM CEST: > OK for maint? I'll push in 72 hours if there is no objection. This is OK with a NEWS entry and the nit below addressed. Thanks! Ralf > Subject: [PATCH] java: check_JAVA does not cause compilation by "make all" > anymore > Fi

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >