bug#11377: configure.am - fails to remove configure before attempting replacement

2012-04-28 Thread Ronald F. Guilmette
Under certain very reasonable scenarios, the configure file contained within some source tree may perhaps be marked as read-only. When and if this occurs, automake will fail to remove the configure file before it attempts to generate it anew. The following trivial patch corrects this problem.

bug#11369: 2 test failures in Automake-1.12

2012-04-28 Thread Stefano Lattarini
severity 11369 minor tags 11369 - moreinfo tags 11369 + patch close 11369 thanks On 04/28/2012 10:27 PM, Matt Burgess wrote: > > Due to our particular build environment, automake is built and tested > as the root user in a chroot environment. > Ah, this explain it all. So this error was due to a

bug#11369: 2 test failures in Automake-1.12

2012-04-28 Thread Matt Burgess
On Sat, 2012-04-28 at 21:37 +0200, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > Oops, you have no 'lex' program installed on your machine, still this > test was not skipped because it was mistakenly requiring 'yacc' instead > of 'lex'. Fixed by the attached patch (for maint). Thanks, Stefano. FWIW, I can confirm

bug#11369: 2 test failures in Automake-1.12

2012-04-28 Thread Matt Burgess
On Sat, 2012-04-28 at 21:57 +0200, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > What system are you on exactly? I've reproduced this on a Fedora 16 x86_64 host. > Please send us the contents of the > 't/get-sysconf.log' file, that should report all the relevant (to > us) information and details about your system.

bug#11369: 2 test failures in Automake-1.12

2012-04-28 Thread Stefano Lattarini
tags 11369 moreinfo thanks On 04/28/2012 11:29 AM, Matt Burgess wrote: > FAIL: t/dist-readonly > = > > Running from installcheck: no > Using TAP: no > PATH = > /sources/automake-1.12/t/ax:/sources/automake-1.12/t/wrap:/bin:/usr/bin:/sbin:/usr/sbin:/tools/bin:/usr/sbin > ++ pw

bug#11369: 2 test failures in Automake-1.12

2012-04-28 Thread Stefano Lattarini
Hi Matt, thanks for the report. On 04/28/2012 11:29 AM, Matt Burgess wrote: > Hi, > > Testing the latest release of Automake, I see test failures in > dist-readonly and lex-clean. I've attached the relevant sections of > test-suite.log. > Let's see to the lex failure first: FAIL: t/lex-clean

bug#11371: [Patch] fix silent-rules option

2012-04-28 Thread Stefano Lattarini
tags 11371 wontfix thanks Hi Eric, Marc-Antoine. On 04/28/2012 07:48 PM, Eric Blake wrote: > On 04/28/2012 11:25 AM, Marc-Antoine Perennou wrote: >> The AM_SILENT_RULES macro needs an argument to be enabled. >> Currently, if the silent-rules option is set in AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE, the >> action is an

bug#11369: 2 test failures in Automake-1.12

2012-04-28 Thread Matt Burgess
Hi, Testing the latest release of Automake, I see test failures in dist-readonly and lex-clean. I've attached the relevant sections of test-suite.log. Thanks, Matt. FAIL: t/dist-readonly = Running from installcheck: no Using TAP: no PATH = /sources/automake-1.12/t/ax:/sourc

bug#11371: [Patch] fix silent-rules option

2012-04-28 Thread Eric Blake
On 04/28/2012 11:25 AM, Marc-Antoine Perennou wrote: > The AM_SILENT_RULES macro needs an argument to be enabled. > Currently, if the silent-rules option is set in AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE, the > action is an AC_REQUIRE on the macro, which runs it without any arg, > resulting in an useless action. > The on

bug#11371: [Patch] fix silent-rules option

2012-04-28 Thread Marc-Antoine Perennou
The AM_SILENT_RULES macro needs an argument to be enabled. Currently, if the silent-rules option is set in AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE, the action is an AC_REQUIRE on the macro, which runs it without any arg, resulting in an useless action. The only way for now to enable silent-rules is to call AM_SILENT_RULE

bug#11356: automake 1.12 and (C) 2011

2012-04-28 Thread Stefano Lattarini
Hi Peter. On 04/28/2012 11:42 AM, Peter Rosin wrote: > On 2012-04-27 16:34, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >> -# Copyright (C) 1996-2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc. >> +# Copyright (C) 1996-$RELEASE_YEAR Free Software Foundation, Inc. > > Isn't a paradigm like that "risky" for the case of a late mai

bug#11356: automake 1.12 and (C) 2011

2012-04-28 Thread Peter Rosin
On 2012-04-27 16:34, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > -# Copyright (C) 1996-2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc. > +# Copyright (C) 1996-$RELEASE_YEAR Free Software Foundation, Inc. Isn't a paradigm like that "risky" for the case of a late maintenance release a couple of years after the last release on s

bug#11356: automake 1.12 and (C) 2011

2012-04-28 Thread Stefano Lattarini
On 04/27/2012 04:34 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > Hi Eric, thanks for the suggestion. > > On 04/27/2012 02:05 PM, Eric Blake wrote: >> >>> aclocal (GNU $PACKAGE) $VERSION >>> -Copyright (C) 2011 Free Software Foundation, Inc. >>> +Copyright (C) 2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc. >> >> But this

bug#11356: automake 1.12 and (C) 2011

2012-04-28 Thread Stefano Lattarini
On 04/28/2012 12:51 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > > I think I'll steal the wording from coreutils' README: > > For any copyright year range specified as - in this package > note that the range specifies every single year in that closed interval. > > Patch coming up tomorrow (unless s