bug#12836: automake-1.12 make check: FAIL:2

2012-11-15 Thread Stefano Lattarini
tags 12836 - moreinfo tags 12836 + notabug close 12836 On 11/15/2012 05:33 PM, Tru Huynh wrote: > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 05:24:56PM +0100, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >> Hi Tru, sorry for the further delay. >> > no problem :) >> >>> FAIL: t/lex-header >>> == >>> >>> lex-header: run

bug#12836: automake-1.12 make check: FAIL:2

2012-11-15 Thread Tru Huynh
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 05:24:56PM +0100, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > Hi Tru, sorry for the further delay. > no problem :) > > > FAIL: t/lex-header > > == > > > > lex-header: running flex --version > > flex version 2.5.4 > > > Yikes! According to what I see in

bug#12836: automake-1.12 make check: FAIL:2

2012-11-15 Thread Stefano Lattarini
Hi Tru, sorry for the further delay. On 11/08/2012 10:17 PM, Tru Huynh wrote: > On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 08:27:28PM +0100, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >> I've done several fixes to the Automake testsuite since 1.12 was released; >> could you please try with the last released version (1.12.4) and see i

bug#12845: [PATCH] aclocal: tracing AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIRS can work with older autoconf as well

2012-11-15 Thread Stefano Lattarini
On 11/15/2012 02:13 PM, Eric Blake wrote: > On 11/15/2012 06:08 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >>> Is _AM_EXTRA_RECURSIVE_TARGETS ever traced in any released version of >>> automake? >>> >> No, that's why I wanted to remove it. >> More importantly, we'll have to start pre-selecting the 'AM_EXTRA_RECU

bug#12845: [PATCH] aclocal: tracing AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIRS can work with older autoconf as well

2012-11-15 Thread Eric Blake
On 11/15/2012 06:08 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >> Is _AM_EXTRA_RECURSIVE_TARGETS ever traced in any released version of >> automake? >> > No, that's why I wanted to remove it. > >> If so, you can't remove it from the pre-selections, even if >> newer automake no longer traces it. Basically, the

bug#12845: [PATCH] aclocal: tracing AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIRS can work with older autoconf as well

2012-11-15 Thread Stefano Lattarini
On 11/15/2012 01:53 PM, Eric Blake wrote: > On 11/15/2012 05:46 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > * aclocal.in ($ac_config_macro_dirs_fallback): New global variable, contains m4 code to issue a fallback definition of AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIRS as an alias for the private macro _AM_CONFIG_MAC

bug#12845: [PATCH] aclocal: tracing AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIRS can work with older autoconf as well

2012-11-15 Thread Eric Blake
On 11/15/2012 05:46 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >>> * aclocal.in ($ac_config_macro_dirs_fallback): New global variable, >>> contains m4 code to issue a fallback definition of AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIRS >>> as an alias for the private macro _AM_CONFIG_MACRO_DIRS. >> >> Tracing a new private macro - does

bug#12845: [PATCH] aclocal: tracing AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIRS can work with older autoconf as well

2012-11-15 Thread Stefano Lattarini
On 11/15/2012 01:00 PM, Eric Blake wrote: > On 11/15/2012 03:58 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >>> As soon as you AC_PREREQ([2.70]), then yes, you can quit tracing >>> AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIR. >>> >> The below patch should allow our users to employ AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIRS >> with autoconf 2.69 as well. It

bug#12845: [PATCH] aclocal: AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIRS: work around autom4te option parsing bugs

2012-11-15 Thread Stefano Lattarini
Hi Eric, thanks for the quick feedback. First of all, I've noticed this squash-in is necessary to avoid a spurious testsuite failure: diff --git a/t/aclocal-acdir.sh b/t/aclocal-acdir.sh index 59182bb..944604b 100755 --- a/t/aclocal-acdir.sh +++ b/t/aclocal-acdir.sh @@ -21,6 +21,9 @@

bug#12845: [PATCH] aclocal: tracing AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIRS can work with older autoconf as well

2012-11-15 Thread Eric Blake
On 11/15/2012 03:58 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >> As soon as you AC_PREREQ([2.70]), then yes, you can quit tracing >> AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIR. >> > The below patch should allow our users to employ AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIRS > with autoconf 2.69 as well. It still doesn't work with autoconf 2.68 > and earli

bug#12845: [PATCH] aclocal: AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIRS: work around autom4te option parsing bugs

2012-11-15 Thread Eric Blake
On 11/15/2012 04:52 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > On 11/15/2012 11:58 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >> >> The below patch should allow our users to employ AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIRS >> with autoconf 2.69 as well. It still doesn't work with autoconf 2.68 >> and earlier though, due to a bug in autom4te op

bug#12845: [PATCH] aclocal: AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIRS: work around autom4te option parsing bugs (was: Re: bug#12845: [PATCH] aclocal: tracing AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIRS can work with older autoconf as well)

2012-11-15 Thread Stefano Lattarini
On 11/15/2012 11:58 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > > The below patch should allow our users to employ AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIRS > with autoconf 2.69 as well. It still doesn't work with autoconf 2.68 > and earlier though, due to a bug in autom4te option parsing (fixed by > autoconf commit v2.68-120-gf4b

bug#12845: [PATCH] aclocal: tracing AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIRS can work with older autoconf as well (was: Re: bug#12845: [PATCH] AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIRS: improve tracing and add sanity checks)

2012-11-15 Thread Stefano Lattarini
[+cc automake-patches] On 11/14/2012 03:50 PM, Eric Blake wrote: > On 11/14/2012 07:41 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >>> If I understand your argument correctly, you are claiming that >>> AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIR should _not_ trace into AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIR_TRACE, >>> so that case (2) can be distinguishe